USPTO serial 78555934
SONIC E
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILKE, JOHN
- 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 SONIC E?
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.
Jennifer M. Lantz
Jennifer M. Lantz Haynes and Boone, LLP2323 Victory AvenueSuite 700Dallas, TX 75219Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Candy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Mar 19, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 8, 2008 | 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 8, 2008 | 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 8, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 9, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2008 | 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. |
| May 6, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2007 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Sep 22, 2007 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Sep 20, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | OPPF | OPPOSITION PAPERS RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 28, 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 8, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Aug 26, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 18, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |