USPTO serial 76289764
Serial No. 76289764
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- Law office
- FILE RECEIVED AT REPOSITORY HOLDING AREA FOR FILING
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 Serial No. 76289764?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | FISH BASED PRODUCTS NAMELY SMOKED FISH, GRILLED FISH AND SOY BASED PRODUCTS NAMELY DRIED BEAN CURD AND TOFU | ACTIVE | Aug 30, 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
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 2006 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| May 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 25, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 14, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Dec 10, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 18, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 29, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 6, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |