USPTO serial 79040775
Serial No. 79040775
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STEIN, JAMES W
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 Serial No. 79040775?
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | Non-alcoholic fruit juice beverages; mineral water; beer; vegetable juices (beverages); peanut milk (soft drink); mung bean beverages; must; coke | 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 6, 2018 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2018 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Nov 3, 2016 | CHLD | CHANGE OF OWNER RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Jun 12, 2009 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 21, 2009 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| May 21, 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 21, 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 21, 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. |
| Nov 2, 2007 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Oct 10, 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 21, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2007 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |