USPTO serial 77726577
CHEF ANGELO'S
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, CHRISTINA B
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with CHEF ANGELO'S?
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
Vancouver, BC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark A. Watkins
Mark A. Watkins Hahn Loeser + Parks LLPOne GOJO Plaza, Suite 300Akron, OH 44311UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Snack foods, namely, multigrain chips and multigrain crisps | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2012 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Oct 22, 2012 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Oct 21, 2012 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 25, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 23, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 20, 2012 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 20, 2012 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 22, 2011 | WOAG | WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED | — |
| Dec 22, 2011 | WOAR | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 10, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 7, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 7, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 1, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 14, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 1, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 24, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 4, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 4, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 4, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 24, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 4, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 4, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |