USPTO serial 74296327
GOLDEN FLAKE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 GOLDEN FLAKE?
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.
Paul E. Szabo
PAUL E SZABO TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM & COVELL1111 LEADER BLDGCLEVELAND, OH 44114-1400UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | bread; namely, pita bread; fillo dough (thin pastry dough) and uncooked kataifi (shredded fillo dough) sold in frozen sheet form as an ingredient for combination with other ingredients to make pastries | ABANDONED | Jun 25, 1992 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 1994 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 2, 1994 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 14, 1994 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 14, 1994 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 6, 1993 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 1993 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 12, 1993 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 20, 1993 | 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. |
| Mar 10, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 1993 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 1992 | 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. |
| Sep 29, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 22, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |