USPTO serial 78358974
MUGS UP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JACKSON, STEVEN W
- Law office
- TTAB
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with MUGS UP?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
R. Scott Kimsey
R SCOTT KIMSEY SONNENSCHEIN NATH & ROSENTHAL LLP4520 MAIN ST STE 1100KANSAS CITY, MO 64111UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 043 | Restaurant services, namely, drive-up fast food services offering root beer, hamburgers, fries, chili, and hot dogs | ABANDONED | Jul 31, 1955 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2010 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| May 10, 2010 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| May 10, 2010 | CU.T | CONCURRENT USE TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 25, 2010 | CU.D | CONCURRENT USE DENIED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 30, 2008 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 9, 2008 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 8, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Aug 24, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 26, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 26, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | CWBP | WITHDRAWN BEFORE PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 12, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Sep 16, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 19, 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. |
| Aug 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 6, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |