USPTO serial 78565471
LADY LIGIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NEVILLE, BRIAN
- 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 LADY LIGIA?
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
Friendswood, TX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Delphine James
DELPHINE JAMES DELPHINE JAMES ATTORNEY AT LAW2656 S LOOP W STE 170HOUSTON, TX 77054UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | PRE-PACKAGED AND PROCESSED FOODS FEATURING SPANISH AND BOLIVIAN DELICACIES, NAMELY EMPANADAS, PIZZA, FAJITAS, QUESIDILLAS AND TACOS | INACTIVE - INSUFFICIENT FEE RECEIVED | — |
| 043 | Restaurant services featuring Spanish and Bolivian delicacies including empanadas, pizza, pork served on wooden skewers, fried cheese, fajitas, quesadilla and tacos | ACTIVE | Sep 27, 1977 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 2006 | 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 30, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 12, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Mar 22, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Sep 9, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |