USPTO serial 77568680
SWEET FLOUR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHINER, MARK W
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 SWEET FLOUR?
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
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Janice Bader
JANICE BADER SYMBUS LAW GROUP, LLCPO BOX 933CULPEPER, VA 22701-0933UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail bakery shops | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Mar 27, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 26, 2010 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 26, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Mar 3, 2010 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 3, 2010 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 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 16, 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 27, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 14, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 14, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 14, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 29, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 11, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 11, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |