USPTO serial 78350437
ISRAELITE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MILTON, PRISCILLA
- 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 ISRAELITE?
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
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey S. Standley
Jeffrey S. Standley STANDLEY LAW GROUP495 METRO PLACE SOUTH, STE 210DUBLIN, OH 43017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Diet foods, namely, prepared meals consisting primarily of meat, fish, poultry or vegetables | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | Diet foods, namely, low calorie chocolates, low calorie bakery desserts, frozen confections, and cookies | ACTIVE | — |
| 032 | Diet drinks, namely, low calorie soft drinks and reduced calorie beer | 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 Reese, Ralph
- Other trademarks owned by Reese, Ralph
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Other trademarks in Class 032
- Similar marks named ISRAELITE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Aug 27, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jan 31, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Aug 18, 2006 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Jul 6, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2005 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 5, 2005 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 14, 2005 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 14, 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. |
| May 25, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 26, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 18, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 31, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 20, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 20, 2005 | 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 19, 2005 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 29, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 27, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 18, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 27, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Jul 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |