USPTO serial 78761467
FARNESE GALLERY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YONTEF, DAVID ERIC
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 FARNESE GALLERY?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GERALD T. SHEKLETON
GERALD T SHEKLETON WELSH & KATZ LTD120 S RIVERSIDE PLZ FL 22CHICAGO, IL 60606-3912UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Building materials, namely non-metal tiles and non-metal tile flooring | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 30, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 7, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 5, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 1, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |