USPTO serial 78599309
LE RÊVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMITH, BRIDGETT G
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 LE RÊVE?
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.
Lauri S. Thompson, Esq.
LAURI S THOMPSON ESQ GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP3773 HOWARD HUGHES PKWY STE 500 NLAS VEGAS, NV 89109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | plates, meal trays; serving trays not of precious metal, cookie jars, plastic water bottles sold empty, insulated beverage holders, vases, statuettes of glass, porcelain and earthenware, non-metal candlestick holders, coasters not of paper and not being table linen, bottle openers, cork screws, non-metal decorative boxes and non-metal banks, statues made of china, crystal, earthenware, glass, porcelain, and terra cotta, hair brushes, hair combs, toothbrushes, electric toothbrushes | 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 19, 2008 | 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. |
| May 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 7, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 7, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 1, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 1, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 14, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 8, 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. |
| Nov 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 7, 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 27, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |