USPTO serial 77691042
DON'T-THINK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PARK, JENNY K
- 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 DON'T-THINK?
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.
Amy L. Brosius
AMY L. BROSIUS FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.P.O. BOX 1022MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440-1022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Bakeware; beverage glassware; beverage ware, namely, mugs, coffee cups, tea cups, insulated beverage containers for domestic use, water bottles sold empty; cookware, namely, pans, frying pans, sauce pans, non-electric griddles, pots; dinnerware; glass bowls and dishes; ice cream scoops; kitchen tools and utensils, namely, spatulas, strainers, sieves, whisks, cutting boards, containers for food dispensing, containers for food storage; napkin rings; salad bowls not of precious metal; service utensils, namely, serving spoons, serving ladles, serving forks, serving tongs; serving vessels, namely, serving bowls, serving dishes, serving platters, gravy boats, butter dishes; spoon rests; trivets | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19, 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. |
| Jul 19, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Sep 22, 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. |
| Sep 2, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 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. |
| Jun 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 17, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |