USPTO serial 78550774
I-BREW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- COLEMAN, CIMMERIAN
- 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 I-BREW?
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.
/JAMES W POTTHAST
JAMES W POTTHAST LAW OFFICES OF POTTHAST & ASSOCIATES10606 DEERPATH RDWOODSTOCK, IL 60098UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Commercial, electric coffee brewers, electric tea brewers, electric fresh iced tea brewers and high volume electric coffee brewing systems and electric tea brewing systems composed of modular brewers, storage tanks and mobile dispensers that interconnect and work together as a single system, sold to restaurants, coffee shops, caterers, banquette halls and other like commercial entities that serve large quantities of freshly brewed beverage | 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 Food Equipment Technologies Company, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Food Equipment Technologies Company, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 011
- Similar marks named I-BREW
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2009 | 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. |
| May 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 14, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 2, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 16, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 16, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 14, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 14, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 14, 2008 | ABND | ABANDONMENT DELETED BY TTAB | — |
| May 9, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 9, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 17, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 17, 2006 | 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 17, 2006 | 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 6, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 22, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |