USPTO serial 86912235
SUPER YAKIMA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOLDEN, LAURA DAWN
- 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 SUPER YAKIMA?
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Wines derived from grapes grown in YAKIMA VALLEY AVA, labeled and advertised in compliance with WASHINGTON, USA laws for TABLE 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 21, 2017 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| May 2, 2017 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2017 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Mar 15, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2017 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 2017 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2017 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2017 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 22, 2017 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2017 | 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. |
| Jun 9, 2016 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 9, 2016 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 9, 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. |
| Jun 3, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 24, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 22, 2016 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |