USPTO serial 78092754
A MASTERPIECE BY THE SEA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with A MASTERPIECE BY THE SEA?
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.
Michael A. Lechter
DAVID E ROGERS SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY LLPTWO RENAISSANCE SQ40 N CENTRAL AVE STE 2700PHOENIX, AZ 85004-4498Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | resort and lodging services; restaurant, catering, bar and lounge services; provision of general-purpose facilities for meetings, conferences and exhibitions; reservation services for hotel accommodations for others; health spa services; physical fitness consultation services; massage services; beauty salon services | ACTIVE | — |
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.
- Other trademarks owned by The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
- Other trademarks owned by LAGUNA BEACH RESORTS LLC
- Other trademarks owned by LAGUNA BEACH RESORTS LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named A MASTERPIECE BY THE SEA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 28, 2005 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 25, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 30, 2004 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Apr 10, 2003 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 1, 2003 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Mar 12, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 4, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 3, 2003 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 2, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2002 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 25, 2002 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Sep 25, 2002 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Sep 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 11, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 8, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 19, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |