USPTO serial 79161265
BESTRA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PHILLIPS, WENDELL SHARMAN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 BESTRA?
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 | Fruit, preserved; fruit chips; tomato puree; fruit salads; fruit jellies; pectin for food; edible oils; milk; fruits, tinned canned (Am.); black pudding | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2025 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Nov 4, 2016 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Oct 17, 2016 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 15, 2016 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 26, 2016 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 10, 2016 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 10, 2016 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 15, 2015 | 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. |
| Oct 15, 2015 | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2015 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 16, 2015 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 16, 2015 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Mar 15, 2015 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Mar 14, 2015 | 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 14, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 14, 2015 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2015 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |