USPTO serial 78264752
Serial No. 78264752
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WHITTAKER BROWN, TRACY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 Serial No. 78264752?
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.
Laurel V. Dineff
LAUREL V DINEFF DINEFF TRADEMARK LAW LIMITED160 N WACKER DRCHICAGO, IL 60606UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Bovine meat.; Bovine meat. | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 27, 2006 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 10, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 27, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 15, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2004 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |