USPTO serial 78522152
FRICK & FRACK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- 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 FRICK & FRACK?
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.
B. Joseph Schaeff
B JOSEPH SCHAEFF DINSMORE & SHOHL LLPONE DAYTON CTR ONE S MAIN ST STE 1300DAYTON, OH 45402UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Prepared food for consumption on and off the premises, namely, restaurant menu items in the nature of entrees, side dishes and appetizers consisting primarily of meat, fish, poultry or vegetables; prepared food for consumption on and off the premises, namely, restaurant menu items in the nature of chicken wings, chicken salads, vegetable salads, fried potatoes, fried onions, fried cheese, soup, applesauce, hot dogs and corndogs | 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 Fricker's Progressive Concepts, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Fricker's Progressive Concepts, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Similar marks named FRICK & FRACK
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 21, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 20, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 13, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 12, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 28, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 28, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |