USPTO serial 77547844
BEST CARE, BEST ENVIRONMENTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARTNER, JOHN M
- 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 BEST CARE, BEST ENVIRONMENTS?
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
Philadelphia, PA
Philadelphia, PA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Scott Bradley Schwartz
SCOTT BRADLEY SCHWARTZ COZEN O'CONNOR1900 MARKET STREETPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3527UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by ARAMARK Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by ARAMARK Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Other trademarks in Class 043
- Similar marks named BEST CARE, BEST ENVIRONMENTS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 24, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2010 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 24, 2010 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 24, 2010 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 25, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 2, 2009 | 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. |
| May 13, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 29, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Oct 22, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |