Home ›
Trademark Categories ›
Jewelry ›
2010 ›
TH ›
THERE'S NO DIAMOND LIKE A LOVEMARK
Trademark search for:
THERE'S NO DIAMOND LIKE A LOVEMARK
No active United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registrations found, based on publicly available USPTO trademark records.
Trademark records may change over time.
For the most up-to-date trademark status, domain availability,
and social handle checks, run a live search.
Check latest trademark, domains & social handles
Live search · Most up-to-date results
USPTO Filing History
Key events recorded for this trademark application
2010-05-18 — Application filed
2010-05-21 — Application filed
2010-05-22 — Application filed
2010-05-25 — Notice of pseudo mark mailed
2010-06-18 — Assigned to examiner
2010-06-18 — Examiners amendment -written
2010-06-18 — Examiner's amendment entered
2010-06-18 — Approved for pub - principal register
2010-06-21 — Examiner's amendment mailed
2010-07-01 — Assigned to lie
2010-07-01 — Law office publication review completed
2010-07-11 — Withdrawn from pub - og review query
2010-07-15 — Previous allowance count withdrawn
2010-08-06 — Examiners amendment -written
2010-08-06 — Examiner's amendment entered
2010-08-06 — Examiners amendment mailed
2010-08-06 — Approved for pub - principal register
2010-08-12 — Law office publication review completed
2010-08-25 — Notice of publication
2010-09-14 — Published for opposition
2010-11-09 — Noa mailed - sou required from applicant
2011-06-13 — Application abandoned
2011-06-13 — Application abandoned
2011-06-13 — Final status recorded
2011-06-14 — Teas change of correspondence received
2011-06-14 — Teas change of correspondence received
Owner Information
Stuckey Diamonds, Inc.
Houston , TX
Stuckey Diamonds, Inc.
Houston , TX
Correspondent
Robert F. Zielinski Law Offices of Robert F. Zielinski One South Broad Street Suite 1500 Philadelphia, PA 19107
Filing Details
Filing Date:
2010-05-18
Status Date:
2011-06-13
Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.
Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.