USPTO serial 77708732
SAN GIOVANNI'S SPECIALTY FOODS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MARTIN, EUGENIA 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 SAN GIOVANNI'S SPECIALTY FOODS?
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
Palop International (Canada) Inc.
Point Edward, Ontario, CA
Palop International (Canada) Inc.
Point Edward, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Scott E. Rogers
SCOTT E. ROGERS SCANDAGLIA & RYAN55 EAST MONROESUITE 3440CHICAGO, IL 60603-5713Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Corn oil; Edible oils; Maize oil; Oil, namely, flavored oil, cooking oil and oil for pasta dishes; Oils and fats for food; Olive oil; Olive oils; Salad oil; Sesame oil; Sesame oil; Tomato paste; Tomato puree; Vegetable oils | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | Dried pasta; Mayonnaise; Pasta; Pasta and noodles; Pizza; Pizzas | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Palop International (Canada) Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Palop International (Canada) Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Similar marks named SAN GIOVANNI'S SPECIALTY FOODS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 1, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2011 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 23, 2011 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2011 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 25, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 29, 2010 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2010 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 21, 2010 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 29, 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. |
| Dec 29, 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. |
| Oct 6, 2009 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 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 1, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 1, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 27, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 26, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 26, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 26, 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 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 11, 2009 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 10, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |