USPTO serial 78076460
BREAKFAST BITES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMAS, AMY E
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 BREAKFAST BITES?
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.
Bert A. Collison
BERT A COLLISON LATHROP & GAGE LC230 PARK AVE STE 1847NEW YORK, NY 10169UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Frozen, packaged or prepared Mexican foods, namely corn tortillas with chicken, beef, egg, fruit, or cheese fillings, flour tortillas with chicken, beef, egg, fruit, or cheese fillings. | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 3, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 22, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2004 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 26, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 26, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Feb 19, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 14, 2003 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 12, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 12, 2002 | 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 12, 2002 | 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. |
| May 7, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 2001 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |