USPTO serial 78698455
S
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHANAHAN, PATRICK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105
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 S?
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
New York, NY
New York, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Janet A. Kobrin
JANET A KOBRIN WARNER BROS ENTERTAINMENT INCBRIDGE BLDG 156 N #50824000 WARNER BLVDBURBANK, CA 91522Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Processed and dried vegetables; processed and dried fruits; processed ginseng for use as vegetable; raisins; fruit salads; fruit jellies; marmalade; preserved onions; preserved olives; crystallized fruits; jams; chocolate nut butter; cocoa butter for food purposes; peanut butter; canned fruits and vegetables; pickles; soybean-based food beverage used as a milk substitute; frozen fruits and vegetables; potato chips; processed and dried meat; meat; milk; seafood; margarine | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Feb 29, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 29, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 29, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 29, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 31, 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 6, 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. |
| Nov 14, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Sep 6, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Mar 15, 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 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |