USPTO serial 79015813
CITYNOVA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GEORGE, DAHLIA
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 CITYNOVA?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Articles of clothing, footwear, headgear | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2015 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Jan 22, 2015 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Oct 5, 2007 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Aug 10, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 12, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2005 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Nov 3, 2005 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 2, 2005 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Nov 1, 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 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |