USPTO serial 85422398
A REVOLUTION IN ORAL CARE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VAGHANI, MAYUR C
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 A REVOLUTION IN ORAL CARE?
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.
Warner J. Delaune
WARNER J DELAUNE BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN CALDWELL & BERKOW450 LAUREL STREETBATON ROUGE, LA 70801-1817UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Dental care products, namely, mouthwashes having compounds containing natural or synthesized theobromine | ACTIVE | Jan 2, 2012 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2013 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 5, 2013 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 5, 2013 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 14, 2013 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 1, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 2013 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2013 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 24, 2013 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 24, 2013 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 24, 2012 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2012 | 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. |
| Jul 24, 2012 | 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 3, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 2, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2012 | 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 1, 2012 | ATRV | ATTORNEY REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 10, 2012 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 6, 2012 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 28, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 18, 2012 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 18, 2012 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 18, 2012 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Dec 30, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 17, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |