USPTO serial 76620390
ICEBERG SELECT 100% NATURAL NEWFOUNDLAND ROPE-CULTURED MUSSELS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HAN, DAWN L
- 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 ICEBERG SELECT 100% NATURAL NEWFOUNDLAND ROPE-CULTURED MUSSELS?
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
Badger Bay Mussel Farms Limited
Newfoundland A0J 1V0, CA
Badger Bay Mussel Farms Limited
Newfoundland A0J 1V0, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey H. Kaufman
Jeffrey H. Kaufman Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P1940 Duke StreetAlexandria, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Cultured mussels, not live | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Badger Bay Mussel Farms Limited
- Other trademarks owned by Badger Bay Mussel Farms Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Similar marks named ICEBERG SELECT 100% NATURAL NEWFOUNDLAND ROPE-CULTURED MUSSELS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 11, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 11, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 17, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Sep 17, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 25, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 2, 2009 | 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. |
| May 13, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 27, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 6, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 6, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 28, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 27, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 22, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 22, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 19, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 19, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 16, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 6, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 5, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 5, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 18, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 12, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 21, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 21, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 8, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 17, 2005 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 17, 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. |
| Jun 15, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 27, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |