USPTO serial 76258046
DINEASY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SNAPP, TINA LOUISE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 DINEASY?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
DouglaS H. Goldhush
DOUGLAS H GOLDHUSH ARENT FOX KINTNER PLOTKIN & KAHN PLLC1050 CONNECTICUT AVE NW STE 400WASHINGTON, DC 20036-5339UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | bakeware, cookware and gift ware, namely, small wares related to dining and cooking; speciality food items, condiments, specifically foods, namely, soups and salads, sauces, chutneys, relishes, olives, oils, vinegars, spices, breads, bakery items, appetizers, snacks, seafood, meats, comfort foods, lasagna, shepherd's pie, quiches, pastas, vegetables, potatoes, rice, fruits, speciality hot and cold beverages and desserts | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | retail store services relating in the field of fresh, frozen, and prepared food products, cooking wares, kitchen wares, gift ware and small wares related to cooking and dining and ancillary items relating to cooking and dining | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jan 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 25, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 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. |
| Jul 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |