USPTO serial 76299658
THE LAST BEST PLACE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- Law office
- OFFICE OF TRADEMARK PROGRAM CONTROL
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 THE LAST BEST PLACE?
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.
Luke W. DeMarte
Luke W. DeMarte SEYFARTH SHAW LLPSuite 2400131 S. Dearborn StreetChicago, IL 60603Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Pots, plates, bowls, beverageware, and cookware, namely, pans, skillets, dutch ovens, trivets, casseroles and griddles and bakeware | ACTIVE | Jul 1, 2007 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2012 | 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. |
| Nov 26, 2012 | 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. |
| May 4, 2012 | 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. |
| May 4, 2012 | CNRT | SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN | 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 6, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 6, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 6, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 3, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 3, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 3, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 3, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 3, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Dec 30, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 30, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 1, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 20, 2006 | NEWN | NEW NOA TO ISSUE | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 6, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 18, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | IUCN | NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE CANCELLED | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | OTHE | CASE RETURNED TO EXAMINATION | — |
| Nov 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 20, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 3, 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 30, 2005 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 8, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 25, 2004 | IUCN | NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE CANCELLED | — |
| May 25, 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. |
| Mar 2, 2004 | 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 11, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 5, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 29, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 24, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 6, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 14, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 8, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 20, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Oct 24, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 3, 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. |
| Mar 28, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |