USPTO serial 78324038
CLASSIC OUTBACK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPARACINO, MARK V
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 CLASSIC OUTBACK?
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.
Owner
Kangaroo Ridge Wine Company Pty Ltd
Tanunda, South Australia, 5352, AU
Other trademarks owned by Kangaroo Ridge Wine Company Pty Ltd
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Fred W. Hathaway, uire
FRED W HATHAWAY UIRE BURNS, DOANE, SWECKE4R & MATHIS LLPPO BOX 1404ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | WINES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 26, 2009 | 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. |
| May 25, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 10, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 5, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 12, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 25, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 22, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 17, 2004 | 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 16, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 3, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |