USPTO serial 76673208
FOOD PARTNERS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VENGROFF, MARILYN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 FOOD PARTNERS?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Bruce A. McDonald
BRUCE A. MCDONALD SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP2001 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W.SUITE 300WASHINGTON, DC 20006-1825Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION AND DELIVERY OF FOOD AND BEVERAGES, CLEANING PRODUCTS, KITCHEN EQUIPMENT, TABLEWARE, AND DINING ROOM FURNISHINGS TO CUSTOMERS IN THE INSTITUTIONAL FOODSERVICE MARKET, NAMELY, RESTAURANTS, HOTELS, SCHOOLS, SUPERMARKET DELIS, AND INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING HEALTH CARE FACILITIES, HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES, PRISONS, SUMMER CAMPS AND UNIVERSITIES | ACTIVE | May 22, 2008 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 2009 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Feb 28, 2009 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jul 2, 2008 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2008 | NAUD | REPORT UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 26, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A 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. |
| Nov 23, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A 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 31, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2007 | 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 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |