USPTO serial 77854192
MENU MUNDO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAMOTHE, LESLEY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with MENU MUNDO?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Haverly MacArthur
HAVERLY RAUEN MACARTHUR ADAMS AND REESE LLP424 CHURCH ST STE 2800NASHVILLE, TN 37219-2386UNITED STATESGoods and services
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2013 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Nov 15, 2013 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Apr 2, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 23, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 23, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 13, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 14, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 14, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 13, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 16, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 28, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 28, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 14, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2010 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 26, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Jan 26, 2010 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Jan 26, 2010 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Jan 25, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 27, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 24, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |