USPTO serial 79040688
OLIOVILLA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PEREZ, STEVEN M
- 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 OLIOVILLA?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Meat, fish, poultry and game; meat extracts; preserved, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies, jams, compotes; eggs, milk and milk products; edible oils and fats, olive oils | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 13, 2017 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 15, 2017 | RNWL | INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION RENEWED | — |
| Jun 26, 2009 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 18, 2009 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| May 16, 2009 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 5, 2009 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jan 22, 2009 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 22, 2009 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| May 16, 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. |
| May 16, 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. |
| Oct 8, 2007 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Sep 17, 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. |
| Sep 10, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2007 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |