USPTO serial 78775019
VINE VALLEY VINEYARDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 VINE VALLEY VINEYARDS?
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.
Stephen L. Baker
Stephen L. Baker Baker and Rannells PASuite 102575 Route 28Raritan, NJ 08869Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Wine | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 18, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 6, 2009 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 6, 2009 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 6, 2009 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Oct 30, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | 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 30, 2007 | 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 7, 2007 | 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 18, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 19, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 16, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 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. |
| Jan 16, 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. |
| Jun 17, 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 17, 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. |
| Jun 15, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 31, 2006 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Jan 31, 2006 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |