USPTO serial 78362921
MENU
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALTREE, NICHOLAS
- 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 MENU?
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
BOUCHERVILLE, QUEBEC, CA
BOUCHERVILLE, QUEBEC, CA
Boucherville, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stewart L. Gitler
STEWART L. GITLER WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC2000 Duke StreetSuite 100Alexandria, VA 22314Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Powder detergent soap, dishwashing detergent, all purpose cleaner, pre-moistened towelettes impregnated with dishwashing detergent | ACTIVE | — |
| 006 | Aluminum foil paper | ACTIVE | — |
| 016 | Cardboard pizza boxes, paper filters for coffee makers, plastic wrap, hot dog wrap, plastic bags for packaging | 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 COLABOR, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
- Other trademarks owned by COLABOR, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
- Other trademarks owned by Colabor Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Other trademarks in Class 006
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Similar marks named MENU
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 16, 2015 | 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. |
| Nov 16, 2015 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2015 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2015 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 9, 2015 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2015 | 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. |
| Oct 22, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2014 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 16, 2014 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 8, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2014 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 31, 2014 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2014 | 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. |
| Nov 20, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2013 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 12, 2013 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 8, 2013 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2013 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 16, 2013 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2013 | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2012 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Aug 21, 2012 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2012 | 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 1, 2012 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2012 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 17, 2012 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 17, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 17, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 5, 2012 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 2012 | 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. |
| May 2, 2012 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Apr 30, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 30, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 30, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 2012 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2012 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Apr 20, 2012 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2012 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 7, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 7, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 7, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 7, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 7, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 7, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 6, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 6, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 4, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 3, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 3, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 3, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Feb 15, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 30, 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 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |