USPTO serial 77020253
TEP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINKER, ANTHONY MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 TEP?
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.
Barbara J. Grahn, Esq.
BARBARA J GRAHN ESQ OPPENHEIMER WOLFF & DONNELLY LLP45 S 7TH ST STE 3300MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1650UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Foods, namely, egg-based meat and cheese substitutes and egg-based protein additives for use in other food products; a wide variety of food products containing protein or constituents derived from eggs | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Nov 1, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 29, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 28, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 20, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 25, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 25, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 26, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |