USPTO serial 79009217
HOMEY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEAM, ALEX S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 HOMEY?
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Dumplings; steamed stuffed buns; sweetened bean pastes; sweet dumplings made of glutinous flour; rice pudding; fried rice; dumplings made of glutinous rice wrapped in bamboo or reed leaves; steamed bread; steamed buns stuffed with sweetened bean paste; instant rice; meat pies; pasty; sushi; vol-au-vent; natural or artificial ice; edible ices; ice cream; ice lollies; sauces (condiments); beer vinegar; soya sauce; shrimp sauce; oyster sauce; fish sauce; fresh shrimp sauce | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2015 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Feb 21, 2015 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 17, 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. |
| Nov 17, 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. |
| Jun 2, 2005 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 21, 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. |
| Apr 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Apr 7, 2005 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |