USPTO serial 78704359
WILDBERRY FARM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STOIDES, KATHERINE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 WILDBERRY FARM?
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
Wilyabrup WA 6280, AU
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Leigh Ann Lindquist
LEIGH ANN LINDQUIST SUGHRUE MION PLLC2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20037-3213UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, EXCLUDING BEER, NAMELY, WINE, FORTIFIED WINE AND WINE BASED 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Dec 30, 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. |
| May 28, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 28, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 30, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 30, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 14, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 14, 2006 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 14, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 8, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 16, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 16, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |