USPTO serial 85183811
PICK O'SEA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLANDU, FLORENTINA
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 PICK O'SEA?
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.
Jill Anderfuren
JILL ANDERFUREN MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP233 S WACKER DR STE 6300CHICAGO, IL 60606-6471UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Seafood; fresh, frozen, and canned fish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 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. |
| Feb 18, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 6, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 3, 2013 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jun 14, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 31, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 4, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 19, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 16, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 3, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 19, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 25, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 17, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 4, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2011 | 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 8, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2011 | 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 3, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 29, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 26, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |