USPTO serial 78536199
10 CANE, RUM, TRINIDAD, KINGDOM OF RUM, SACCHARUM OFFICINARUM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YAO, GRETTA
- 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 10 CANE, RUM, TRINIDAD, KINGDOM OF RUM, SACCHARUM OFFICINARUM?
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.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVENEW YORK, NY 10017-5621UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Spirits and liqueurs, namely rum and rum-based alcoholic beverages, prepared alcoholic cocktails, fruit flavoured alcoholic beverages | 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 Moet Hennessy Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
- Other trademarks owned by Moet Hennessy Asia Pacific Pte Ltd
- Other trademarks in Class 033
- Similar marks named 10 CANE, RUM, TRINIDAD, KINGDOM OF RUM, SACCHARUM OFFICINARUM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 4, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 4, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 20, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 20, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2008 | 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 20, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 14, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | 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 20, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | CHPB | POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Mar 1, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 24, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 19, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 7, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |