USPTO serial 76341585
ONE PRICE PIZZA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCCAULEY, BRENDAN D
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 ONE PRICE PIZZA?
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
BURLINGTON, ONTARIO L7S 1M5, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Judith L. Grubner
JUDITH L GRUBNER MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLPSTE 2000TWO PRUDENTIAL PLZ 180 N STETSON AVECHICAGO, IL 60601Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | FOOD PRODUCTS, NAMELY, PIZZA AND PASTA, PIZZA DOUGH, PASTA SAUCE, PIZZA SAUCE AND TOMATO SAUCE, SPICES; NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NAMELY, COFFEE; TEA; COFFEE-BASED BEVERAGES; TEA-BASED BEVERAGES | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | RESTAURANT FRANCHISING SERVICES | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | RESTAURANT SERVICES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2009 | 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. |
| May 5, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 7, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 28, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 31, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 22, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 13, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 22, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 25, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 23, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 28, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 19, 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. |
| Feb 12, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |