USPTO serial 74603891
PHYTOSOME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRENCH, CURTIS W
- 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 PHYTOSOME?
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.
RALPH E. BUCKNAM
RALPH E BUCKNAM BUCKNAM AND ARCHER600 OLD COUNTRY RDGARDEN CITY LONG ISLAND, NY 11530UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | complexes of vegetable substances with phospholipids for use in the manufacture of cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and health foods | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 12, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 12, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 12, 2001 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Nov 1, 2000 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 11, 2000 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 11, 2000 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Mar 28, 2000 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| May 20, 1999 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| May 13, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 23, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 9, 1998 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 1998 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 3, 1998 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 22, 1997 | 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. |
| Jun 2, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 1996 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 1996 | 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. |
| Nov 2, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 1995 | 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. |
| May 10, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 5, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |