USPTO serial 78539054
VIANNEY VISTE Y DECORA TU HOGAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BOAGNI, MARY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 VIANNEY VISTE Y DECORA TU HOGAR?
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.
Meyer A. Gross
MEYER A GROSS SCHWEITZER CORNMAN GROSS & BONDELL LLP19TH FL292 MADISON AVENEW YORK, NY 10017Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | TABLE CLOTHS AND NAPKINS NOT MADE OF PAPER; UNFITTED FABRIC SOFA COVER; BED CLOTHS, NAMELY, COMFORTERS, BED SPREADS, DUVETS, BED SHEETS, DUST RUFFLES, PILLOW SHAMS, PILLOW SLIPS, COUNTERPANES, NAMELY BEDSPREADS THAT EXTEND TO COVER THE LEGS OF THE BED; BLANKET THROWS, BED BLANKETS; CURTAIN SETS CONSISTING OF CURTAINS AND CURTAIN RODS; TOILET SETS CONSISTING OF FITTED TOILET LID COVERS MADE OF FABRIC; KITCHEN ACCESSORIES, NAMELY, POT HOLDERS, OVEN MITTS, AND TOWELS; TORTILLA COVERS, NAMELY, CLOTHS TO COVER TORTILLAS | ACTIVE | Dec 31, 1997 |
| 035 | RETAIL STORE SERVICES FEATURING BEDDING, TABLE CLOTHS; MAIL AND ONLINE CATALOG SERVICES FEATURING BEDDING, TABLE CLOTHS | ACTIVE | Dec 31, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 14, 2006 | 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 13, 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. |
| Oct 23, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 20, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Feb 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 8, 2005 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2005 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |