USPTO serial 76273444
SUMMIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEVERLY, JOSETTE MICHELLE
- 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 SUMMIT?
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.
Leslie K. Mitchell
LESLIE K MITCHELL FITZPATRICK CELLA HARPER & SCINTO30 ROCKEFELLER PLZNEW YORK, NY 10112-3801UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Confectionery, namely, candy, caramels and chocolate | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Apr 11, 2006 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Dec 3, 2005 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 26, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 1, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 28, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 13, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 26, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 3, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 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. |
| Feb 19, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 2, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 20, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 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 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 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 18, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |