Drawing for KENNY ROGERS ROASTERS WOOD FIRE ROASTED CHICKEN

USPTO serial 74408454

KENNY ROGERS ROASTERS WOOD FIRE ROASTED CHICKEN

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 605
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
Examiner
MIRMAN, DONNA
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 KENNY ROGERS ROASTERS WOOD FIRE ROASTED CHICKEN?

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.

J.W. Gipple

J W GIPPLE GIPPLE & HALEP O BOX 40513WASHINGTON, DC 20016UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
042restaurant services featuring roasted chickenABANDONEDMay 11, 1993

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jan 9, 1995ABN5ABANDONMENT - AFTER PUBLICATION
Nov 29, 1994PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance.
Oct 29, 1994NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION
May 18, 1994CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER
Apr 13, 1994CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE
Apr 11, 1994CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 8, 1994CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE
Oct 21, 1993CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Oct 15, 1993DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER
Oct 12, 1993DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance