USPTO serial 79180727
SULTAN DE-LIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RIEPEL, CHRISTINA MAXINE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 SULTAN DE-LIGHT?
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 | Mineral waters; aerated waters; non-alcoholic beverages, namely carbonated beverages; fruit drinks; fruit juices; syrups for making beverages; preparations for making beverages, namely fruit drinks | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2026 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Nov 24, 2017 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Nov 3, 2017 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 3, 2017 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 30, 2017 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 14, 2017 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 14, 2017 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 28, 2017 | CHLD | CHANGE OF OWNER RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Nov 3, 2016 | 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. |
| Nov 3, 2016 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2016 | CHLD | CHANGE OF OWNER RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Apr 7, 2016 | RDX2 | ACTION FOR REQ FOR RECON DENIED NO APPEAL FILED MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2016 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2016 | RRDX | ACTION REQ FOR RECON DENIED NO APPEAL FILED COUNTED NOT MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 6, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 2016 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 17, 2016 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 16, 2016 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 9, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 5, 2016 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Feb 2, 2016 | 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. |
| Jan 20, 2016 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 20, 2016 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Jan 19, 2016 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2016 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jan 15, 2016 | 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. |
| Jan 15, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 15, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2016 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |