Drawing for NECTAR JUICE BAR. TAKE-OUT.

USPTO serial 76421136

NECTAR JUICE BAR. TAKE-OUT.

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
KIM, SOPHIA SUJIN
Law office
TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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.

Status 602: 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.

Need help with NECTAR JUICE BAR. TAKE-OUT.?

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.

Lisa A. Pieroni

LISA A PIERONI KIRSCHSTEIN, OTTINGER, ISRAEL489 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
043TAKE-OUT RESTAURANT SERVICES, NAMELY, FRESH FRUIT JUICES, SOUPS, SALADS, SANDWICHES AND DESSERTSACTIVEJan 21, 2002

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

Latest event (MAB2): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Sep 6, 2005MAB2ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPONDThe 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.
Sep 2, 2005ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
Jan 31, 2005CNFRFINAL 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.
Jan 28, 2005CNFRFINAL REFUSAL WRITTENA 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 27, 2004RCCKSUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION—
Apr 9, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jul 25, 2003CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Jun 20, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jun 20, 2003TROATEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVEDThis 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.
Dec 20, 2002CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Dec 16, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance