USPTO serial 77268554
GENUINE PRIME RIB BURGER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELL, MARLENE D
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 GENUINE PRIME RIB BURGER?
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
Calgary, Alberta, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gabrielle S. Roth
GABRIELLE S. ROTH DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP1825 EYE ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20006-5403UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Meats, namely, hamburger patties | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 27, 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 19, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 15, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 15, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 15, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 15, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 8, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 7, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 7, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 6, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 7, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Nov 7, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |