USPTO serial 78939359
HARTZ ADVANCED CARE 3 IN 1
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RAPPAPORT, SETH
- 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 HARTZ ADVANCED CARE 3 IN 1?
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.
Amy B. Goldsmith
Amy B. Goldsmith GOTTLIEB RACKMAN & REISMAN P.C.270 MADISON AVE FL 8NEW YORK, NY 10016-0605UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 Hartz Mountain Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by The Hartz Mountain Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Similar marks named HARTZ ADVANCED CARE 3 IN 1
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Mar 3, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 10, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Jun 12, 2007 | 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. |
| May 23, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 9, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 6, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 6, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2007 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 9, 2007 | PBCR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - OG REVIEW QUERY | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 22, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |