USPTO serial 76599825
URBAN ROOTS NEW YORK CITY NEW WAVE GOURMET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMITH, REBECCA A
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 URBAN ROOTS NEW YORK CITY NEW WAVE GOURMET?
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.
John F. Wilk
JOHN F WILK C/O PHILLIPS NIZER LLP666 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10103-0084UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Baldor Specialty Foods, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Baldor Specialty Foods, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Other trademarks in Class 031
- Similar marks named URBAN ROOTS NEW YORK CITY NEW WAVE GOURMET
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 19, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 19, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 19, 2006 | 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 22, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 10, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 27, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 19, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 2, 2005 | 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 2, 2005 | CNRT | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 13, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |