USPTO serial 76309915
OLE FOODS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BATTLE, KENNETH
- Law office
- TTAB
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 OLE FOODS?
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.
J. Ray Riley, Esq.
J RAY RILEY J RAY RILEY & ASSOCIATESPO BOX 980218HOUSTON, TX 77098-0218UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | retail grocery store services | ABANDONED | — |
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 19, 2006 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | OP.S | OPPOSITION SUSTAINED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 12, 2004 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | OPPF | OPPOSITION PAPERS RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| 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 11, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 11, 2004 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2003 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 7, 2003 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jun 15, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 4, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 10, 2003 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 8, 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. |
| Nov 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |