USPTO serial 78139591
OHIO WORLD BEER FEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 OHIO WORLD BEER FEST?
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.
B. Joseph Schaeff
B JOSEPH SCHAEFF KILLWORTH, GOTTMAN, HAGAN & SCHAEFF, L LONE DAYTON CTR STE 500DAYTON, OH 45402-2023UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | entertainment services, namely organizing and operating festivals featuring a variety of activities, including music, crafts, dance exhibitions, art exhibitions, food, beverages and the like | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 27, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 28, 2004 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 12, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 5, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 25, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2003 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 8, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 8, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 21, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 26, 2002 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Nov 21, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |