USPTO serial 75625663
ECOSOY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, LINDA M
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with ECOSOY?
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.
Owner
Jerusalem 91231, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael D. Fishman
MICHAEL D FISHMAN RADER, FISHMAN & GRAUER, PLLC1533 N WOODWARD AVESTE 140BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | SOY-BASED CREAMS FOR USE AS NON-DAIRY TOPPINGS; SOY-BASED NON-DAIRY FOOD BEVERAGES CONTAINING VITAMINS, FORMULAS AND/OR ISOFLAVONS; SOY-BASED FLAVORED NON-DAIRY BEVERAGES FOR USE AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR FLAVORED MILK BEVERAGES; LIQUID NON-DAIRY CREAMER; SOY-BASED FOOD BEVERAGES USED AS A MILK SUBSTITUTE | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | SOY-BASED PUDDINGS; GRANOLAS AND READY TO EAT CEREAL DERIVED FOOD BARS CONTAINING ROASTED SOY BEANS AND/OR SOY-FLOUR INGREDIENTS; SOY-BASED COFFEE SUBSTITUTE; SOY-BASED FOOD PRODUCTS SUCH AS PRETZELS AND SOY-NUTS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2001 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Nov 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 7, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 10, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 17, 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 26, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 1999 | 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 5, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |