USPTO serial 78007835
SMART CHOICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPPENFIELD, ANN
- 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 SMART CHOICE?
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
THOMASVILLE, GA
Minneapolis, MN
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
WILLIAM H. BREWSTER
WILLIAM H. BREWSTER KILPATRICK STOCKTON LLP1100 Peachtree StreetSuite 2800Atlanta, GA 30309-4528Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Frozen dough | 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 FLOWERS BAKERIES BRANDS, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by Roush Products Company, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by THE PILLSBURY COMPANY
- Other trademarks owned by THE PILLSBURY COMPANY
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Similar marks named SMART CHOICE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2009 | 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 12, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Mar 10, 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. |
| Jan 26, 2009 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 22, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 6, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 29, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 12, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 15, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 5, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 10, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 29, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 16, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2000 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |