USPTO serial 78322373
KLUCKERS BROASTED CHICKEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRIFFIN, JAMES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 KLUCKERS BROASTED CHICKEN?
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.
John S. Artz
JOHN S ARTZ ARTZ & ARTZ, PCSTE 25028333 TELEGRAPH RDSOUTHFIELD, MI 48034Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 043 | Restaurant services | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 22, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 22, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Aug 23, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 5, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Jan 4, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 21, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| 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. |
| Jun 10, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |