Drawing for SUPER I.Q. PLUS

USPTO serial 75708835

SUPER I.Q. PLUS

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
JOHNSON, AISHA CLARKE
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 SUPER I.Q. PLUS?

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.

George W Hoover

GEORGE W HOOVER BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN12400 WILSHIRE BLVD SEVENTH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90025UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
001vitamin and mineral supplements in liquid or powder form sold exclusively to food product manufacturers as an ingredient for manufactured food productsACTIVEMar 16, 1999
032fruit juices, fruit juice concentrates, fruit drinks and fruit-flavored drinksACTIVEMar 16, 1999

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
Feb 14, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Feb 14, 2002EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Oct 3, 2001ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Oct 3, 2001EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Jul 11, 2001CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
May 14, 2001JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Feb 5, 2001CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Feb 2, 2001JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Feb 2, 2001EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Jun 6, 2000CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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 13, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 9, 1999CNRTNON-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.
Sep 7, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance