USPTO serial 76164111
BOMBAY ORIGINAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 BOMBAY ORIGINAL?
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.
Kaplesh Kumar
KAPLESH KUMAR LAW OFFICE25 REDWING RDWELLESLEY, MA 02481UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Frozen food entrees consisting primarily of meat, fish, poultry or vegetables | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | Frozen food entrees consisting primarily of pasta and rice; namely mixes for cookies; chocolate covered nuts, namely chocolate covered cashews and chocolate covered peanuts | ACTIVE | — |
| 031 | Unprocessed cashew nuts; unprocessed peanuts | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Puran Foods, Ltd.
- Other trademarks owned by Puran Foods, Ltd.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Other trademarks in Class 031
- Similar marks named BOMBAY ORIGINAL
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2006 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| May 16, 2006 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 15, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 4, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jan 13, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 29, 2004 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 27, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 2004 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 23, 2003 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 3, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 21, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 16, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 12, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 1, 2003 | 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. |
| Feb 5, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 5, 2003 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 27, 2002 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 17, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 26, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 16, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 16, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 14, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 29, 2002 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jun 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2002 | 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 14, 2002 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 5, 2001 | 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 29, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |