USPTO serial 78385029
MONARCH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 MONARCH?
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.
ROBERT J KENNEY
ROBERT J KENNEY BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH LLPPO BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22040-0747UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | Wire cheese slicers, non-electric fruit peelers, non-electric vegetable peelers, non-electric egg slicers, pizza cutters, pizza wheels, nutcrackers not of precious metal, lobster crackers not of precious metal, apple wedgers, and manually-operated meat tenderizing tools, namely, meat tenderizing mallets | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Measuring cups, measuring spoons | ACTIVE | — |
| 021 | Household utensils, namely, basting spoons, mixing spoons, serving spoons, slotted spoons, turners, pasta servers, serving ladles,vegetable mashers, pizza spatulas, basting brushes; kitchen utensils for food preparation, namely melon ballers, garlic presses, meat pounders, whisks; ice cream scoops; jar openers; corkscrews; cookie cutters; pastry cutters; cheese graters; cooking graters; household graters; serving tongs; barbecue tongs; strainers; colanders; bottle openers | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 18, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 29, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 29, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 28, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 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 16, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 27, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |