USPTO serial 77306695
CHEFABLES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, KATHLEEN H
- 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 CHEFABLES?
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.
Martin L. Stern
MARTIN L. STERN MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP180 N STETSON AVE STE 2000CHICAGO, IL 60601-6807UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Cookware, namely, pots and pans; bakeware; kitchen utensils, namely, spatulas, ice cream scoops, slotted turners, slotted spoons, basters, basting spoons, basting brushes, cleaning brushes, ladles, mashers, graters, whisks, cutlery blocks, cutting boards, dishes and plates not of precious metal, non-electric juicers, plastic storage containers for household or domestic use, pitchers, salt shakers, pepper grinders | 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 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 27, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 27, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 27, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 7, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 7, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2008 | 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 7, 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. |
| Feb 11, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 11, 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. |
| Jan 29, 2008 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 29, 2008 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 29, 2008 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 28, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 22, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |