USPTO serial 78724239
PIZZACONZE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLAIR, JASON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with PIZZACONZE?
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.
Joshua A. Lorentz
JOSHUA A LORENTZ DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP255 E 5TH STCINCINNATI, OH 45202-4700UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Pizza | 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 10, 2012 | 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. |
| May 10, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 7, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 23, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 12, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 29, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 28, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 25, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 25, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 25, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 4, 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. |
| Apr 4, 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. |
| Apr 4, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |