USPTO serial 76689246
FRESH'N TASTY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EULIN, INGRID C
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 FRESH'N TASTY?
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
Rougemont, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stephen J. Jeffries
Suite 1002099 Pennsylvania Ave., NWWashington, DC 20006Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | Fruit juices and non-alcoholic fruit beverages | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3, 2011 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2011 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 25, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 25, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 22, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 2, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 21, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 15, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2009 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 21, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 3, 2008 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |