Drawing for ARTISANAL FOODS

USPTO serial 76415966

ARTISANAL FOODS

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
EULIN, INGRID C
Law office
FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)

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 ARTISANAL 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.

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.

Brendan P. McFeely, Esq.

BRENDAN P MCFEELY ESQ KANE KESSLER, PC1350 AVE OF THE AMERICAS, 26TH FLNEW YORK, NY 10019-4896UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
029Foodstuffs, namely, meats and cheeses and dairy-based foods, namely, dairy-based dips and whipped toppingsACTIVE—
035Wholesale and retail store services in the fields of specialty foods, mail order services in the field of specialty foods; and import and export services in the field of specialty foodsACTIVE—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jun 8, 2004DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jun 4, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jun 2, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jun 2, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Apr 2, 2004ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Apr 2, 2004EXFBEXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF—
Dec 23, 2003EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Dec 12, 2003EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
Jun 4, 2003CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Mar 21, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 19, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 19, 2002CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 18, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 13, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance