Drawing for PURE DE-LITE

USPTO serial 78020913

PURE DE-LITE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
RADEMACHER, APRIL LUEDERS
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 PURE DE-LITE?

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.

cathy bradford

NATHAN JENKINS JENKINS & CARTER501 HAMMILL LNRENO, NV 89511-1004UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
005PROTEIN-BASED NUTRITIONAL DRINK MIX FOR USE AS A MEAL REPLACEMENT; PROTEIN-BASED MEAL REPLACEMENT POWDERS; AND PROTEIN-BASED MEAL REPLACEMENT BARSACTIVE—
030CHOCOLATE, NAMELY, MALTITOL SWEETENED CHOCOLATE BARS; LICORICE SWEETENED WITH MALTITOL; CHOCOLATE TRUFFLES AND SWEETENED WITH MALTITROL; AND CANDY SWEETENED WITH MALTITOLACTIVE—

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

Latest event (MAB6): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Mar 21, 2006MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 21, 2006ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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, 2005NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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.
Apr 28, 2005OP.TOPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999—
Apr 28, 2005OP.DOPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999—
Dec 21, 2004COARTEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED—
Sep 13, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jun 30, 2004OP.IOPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999—
Mar 18, 2004MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jan 13, 2004ETOFEXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED—
Dec 16, 2003PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Nov 26, 2003NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Oct 23, 2003CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
May 5, 2003UNPRUNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED—
May 5, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Apr 24, 2003CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Mar 24, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Mar 24, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 18, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Sep 19, 2002CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Aug 15, 2002PETGPETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED—
Apr 22, 2002PETRPETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED—
Apr 22, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 25, 2002ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
Jul 24, 2001CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Apr 9, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jan 24, 2001CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Jan 19, 2001DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance