USPTO serial 78286698
THE DRUNKEN CHEF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SOMERVILLE, ARETHA CHARESE
- 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 THE DRUNKEN CHEF?
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.
Gary E. Lambert
PATRICK D ARCHIBALD LAMBERT & ASSOCIATES92 STATE STBOSTON, MA 02109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | clothing namely, T-shirts, caps, jackets, polo shirts, sweat shirts, shirts, chef hats, aprons, scarves, blouses | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Entertainment services in the nature of a live comedy performances and comedy television series in the field of cooking and culinary arts | 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 Chiapperini, Michael
- Other trademarks owned by Chiapperini, Michael
- Other trademarks in Class 025
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named THE DRUNKEN CHEF
- Prosecution event ARAA explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 6, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 10, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 11, 2004 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 | — |