USPTO serial 85466573
SWEETHEART RED
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- COLLIER, DAVID E
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 SWEETHEART RED?
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.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVE10th FloorNEW YORK, NY 10017-4011Goods 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 28, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 23, 2014 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jul 16, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 1, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 1, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 24, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 16, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 9, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 9, 2012 | 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 11, 2012 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jan 10, 2012 | 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 9, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 14, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 10, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |