USPTO serial 78559382
EVERYONE HAS A ROLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GAYNOR, BARBARA ANNE
- 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 EVERYONE HAS A ROLE?
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.
Carol H. Peters
CAROL H PETERS MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY & POPE1 FINANCIAL CTRBOSTON, MA 02111-2657UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Charitable services, namely, coordination of the procurement and distribution of food donations from manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, retailers, corporations, companies and individuals to organizations and relief efforts providing food to needy people | ACTIVE | — |
| 043 | Charitable services, namely, providing food to needy people | 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 The Greater Boston Food Bank
- Other trademarks owned by The Greater Boston Food Bank
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 043
- Similar marks named EVERYONE HAS A ROLE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 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. |
| Aug 17, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 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. |
| Apr 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. |
| Apr 2, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 13, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 9, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 21, 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. |
| Nov 21, 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. |
| Nov 17, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 7, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 31, 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 31, 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 30, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |