USPTO serial 75423447
FRUITY BLASTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRZYZ, KAREN
- 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 FRUITY BLASTS?
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.
SIMOR L MOSKOWITZ
SIMOR L MOSKOWITZ JACOBSON PRICE HOLMAN & STERN PLLCTHE JENIFER BLDG400 7TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | BREAKFAST CEREAL | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 16, 2003 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 16, 2003 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Mar 5, 2003 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 23, 2002 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 5, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 29, 2001 | 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. |
| Mar 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 21, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 2000 | 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. |
| Nov 12, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 23, 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. |
| Jun 19, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 12, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |