USPTO serial 78203022
SAINT TROPEZ WEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LINCOSKI JR, JOHN T
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 SAINT TROPEZ WEST?
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
Sherman Oaks, CA
Van Nuys, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Rod S. Berman, Esq.
ROD S BERMAN ESQ JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP1900 AVENUE OF THE STARS7TH FLOORLOS ANGELES, CA 90067Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | Precious metals and their alloys; goods in precious metals or coated therewith, namely, jewelry; cufflinks; tie pins; candle holders of precious metal | ACTIVE | — |
| 018 | Leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials, namely, back packs, daypacks, handbags, purses, cosmetic and hair accessory pouches sold empty, and wallets; animal skins, hides; trunks and traveling bags; umbrellas, parasols and walking sticks; whips, harness and saddlery; luggage, purses, gym bags, brief cases, wallets, coin purses, cosmetic cases sold empty, handbags, waist packs, backpacks, fanny packs; small leather goods, namely, leather key cases, leather key chains, pouches of leather; diaper bags, baby carriers worn on the body, bags for carrying babies' accessories | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2012 | 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. |
| Mar 5, 2012 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2012 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2012 | ICNA | NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE CORRECTION ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2011 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2011 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 22, 2011 | EPPA | TEAS POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 18, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2011 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 16, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 9, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2011 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 9, 2011 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 9, 2011 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 1, 2011 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Dec 20, 2010 | TMBN | TTAB RELEASE CASE TO TRADEMARKS | — |
| Dec 20, 2010 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 20, 2010 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 3, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2008 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 19, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 31, 2007 | FIXD | ELECTRONIC RECORD REVIEW COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | ERRR | ON HOLD - ELECTRONIC RECORD REVIEW REQUIRED | — |
| Apr 25, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 25, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 6, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Oct 6, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 7, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 25, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 12, 2003 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |