USPTO serial 78592393
PONTE PIETRA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, CHRISTINA B
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 PONTE PIETRA?
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 LLP292 MADISON AVE FL 19NEW YORK, NY 10017-6313UNITED 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 7, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Jul 14, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 12, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Oct 14, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |