USPTO serial 79000163
GUT FRIELINGSHOF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELENKER, ESTHER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 GUT FRIELINGSHOF?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Charcuterie according to local recipes; preserved, dried and cooked fruit and vegetables; fine foods and prepared dishes, also as deep-frozen goods, mainly made of meat, fish, poultry and game, prepared with fruit and vegetables, also with pasta, potatoes or rice; pickles; salads made with products included in this class | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
| 030 | Bread, pastry and confectionery | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
| 031 | Fresh fruits and vegetables | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 2013 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2006 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 23, 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. |
| Jan 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. |
| Oct 7, 2005 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2005 | 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. |
| May 17, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 13, 2004 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | 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. |
| May 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 23, 2004 | CRCV | CORRECTION TRANSACTION RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Jan 15, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | SDRC | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A SUBSEQ DESIG FROM IB | — |