USPTO serial 75283437
THE ORIGINAL MARYLAND FRIED CHICKEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEVY, MICHAEL S
- 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 THE ORIGINAL MARYLAND FRIED 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.
ANDREW J GRAY
ANDREW J GRAY JACOBSON PRICE HOLMAN & STERNTHE JENIFER BLDG400 7TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | restaurant services | ACTIVE | Oct 10, 1997 |
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 11, 2001 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 11, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 11, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 6, 2000 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Apr 19, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2000 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Apr 17, 2000 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 15, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 14, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 26, 1999 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jan 27, 1999 | 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 5, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 5, 1998 | 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 19, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 1997 | 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 15, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |