USPTO serial 79280669
UJI SENCHA JAPANESE TEA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GERMICK JR., EDWARD JOSEPH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 UJI SENCHA JAPANESE TEA?
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.
M. Scott Alprin
M. Scott Alprin Alprin Law Offices, P.C.5 Pinehurst Circle, N.W.Washington, DC 20015UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; frozen confectionery containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; confectionery, namely, candy and chocolate containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; bread containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; sandwiches containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; steamed buns stuffed with minced meat containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; hamburger sandwiches containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; pizzas containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; hot dog sandwiches containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; meat pies containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; seasonings other than spices containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; ice cream mixes containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; sherbet mixes containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; cereal preparations, namely, processed cereals, cereal-based snack foods, and breakfast cereals containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; chocolate spread containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region; instant confectionery mixes, namely, instant cake mixes, instant brownie mixes, instant muffin mixes, instant pudding mixes and instant doughnut mixes containing green tea made of tea leaves produced in four prefectures, namely, Kyoto, Nara, Shiga and Mie, and processed in Kyoto prefecture by local manufacturers with a method originating from the Uji region | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2023 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Feb 24, 2023 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 24, 2023 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 24, 2022 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE E-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. |
| Feb 24, 2022 | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2021 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 18, 2021 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 18, 2021 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 13, 2021 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2021 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Aug 13, 2021 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jul 15, 2021 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2021 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 2021 | 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. |
| Mar 14, 2021 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Feb 9, 2021 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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 9, 2021 | 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 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Jan 19, 2021 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 19, 2021 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 12, 2021 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 1, 2020 | 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. |
| May 9, 2020 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 17, 2020 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 17, 2020 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Apr 2, 2020 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Apr 1, 2020 | 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 31, 2020 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2020 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 2020 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2020 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |