Home ›
Trademark Categories ›
Pharmaceuticals ›
2000 ›
RE ›
REVIFACE
Trademark search for:
REVIFACE
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
2000-08-22 — Application filed
2001-02-01 — Assigned to examiner
2001-02-08 — Examiner's amendment mailed
2001-02-22 — Approved for pub - principal register
2001-04-06 — Previous allowance count withdrawn
2001-04-09 — Letter of suspension mailed
2001-09-26 — Correspondence received in law office
2001-09-26 — Unresponsive/duplicate paper received
2002-03-14 — Correspondence received in law office
2002-09-20 — Paper received
2002-09-20 — Correspondence received in law office
2002-11-12 — Assigned to examiner
2002-11-13 — Letter of suspension mailed
2003-04-24 — Paper received
2003-04-24 — Correspondence received in law office
2003-06-18 — Letter of suspension mailed
2003-12-11 — Paper received
2003-12-11 — Correspondence received in law office
2003-12-31 — Case file in ticrs
2004-02-13 — Letter of suspension mailed
2004-08-03 — Paper received
2004-08-03 — Correspondence received in law office
2004-08-26 — Report completed suspension check case still suspended
2004-09-03 — Amendment from applicant entered
2004-09-04 — Suspension letter written
2004-09-07 — Letter of suspension mailed
2005-02-03 — Paper received
2005-02-03 — Correspondence received in law office
2005-03-04 — Amendment from applicant entered
2005-03-04 — Suspension letter written
2005-03-07 — Letter of suspension mailed
2005-09-02 — Paper received
2005-09-02 — Correspondence received in law office
2005-09-13 — Amendment from applicant entered
2005-10-04 — Suspension inquiry written
2005-10-05 — Inquiry as to suspension mailed
2006-03-14 — Office action issued
2006-03-14 — Correspondence received in law office
2006-03-30 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2006-04-12 — Suspension letter written
2006-04-13 — Letter of suspension mailed
2006-06-21 — Automatic update of assignment of ownership
2006-07-12 — Assignment of ownership not updated automatically
2006-11-09 — Suspension inquiry written
2006-11-13 — Inquiry as to suspension mailed
2007-05-14 — Office action issued
2007-05-30 — Assigned to lie
2007-05-30 — Correspondence received in law office
2007-05-30 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2007-05-31 — Suspension letter written
2007-06-01 — Letter of suspension mailed
2007-12-01 — Suspension letter written
2007-12-03 — Letter of suspension mailed
2008-06-04 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
2008-06-25 — Suspension inquiry written
2008-06-26 — Inquiry as to suspension mailed
2008-12-22 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2008-12-23 — Correspondence received in law office
2008-12-23 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2008-12-30 — Suspension letter written
2008-12-31 — Letter of suspension mailed
2009-04-08 — Paper received
2009-04-09 — Assigned to lie
2009-04-11 — Correspondence received in law office
2009-04-11 — Amendment from applicant entered
2009-05-08 — Approved for pub - principal register
2009-05-12 — Law office publication review completed
2009-05-27 — Notice of publication
2009-06-16 — Published for opposition
2009-09-08 — Noa mailed - sou required from applicant
2010-04-12 — Application abandoned
2010-04-12 — Application abandoned
2010-04-12 — Final status recorded
Owner Information
INTERPAT INTERNATIONAL PATENTS AND TRADING LIMITED COMPANY
BUDAPEST HU
INTERPAT INTERNATIONAL PATENTS AND TRADING LIMITED COMPANY
BUDAPEST HU
Ceteris Holding B.V.
Rotterdam NL
Correspondent
G FRANKLIN ROTHWELL ROTHWELL FIGG ERNST & MANBECK PC 1425 K ST NW STE 800 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 UNITED STATES
Filing Details
Filing Date:
2000-08-22
Status Date:
2010-04-12
Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.
Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.