USPTO serial 85978490
TEASHOP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KOVALSKY, LAURA G
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 TEASHOP?
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.
Donald L. Dennison
DONALD L. DENNISON DENNISON, SCHULTZ & MACDONALD1727 KING ST STE 105ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-2700UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Coffee, tea, cocoa, sugar, rice, tapioca, sago, artificial coffee; flour and preparations made from cereals; bread, biscuits and bakery products; pastry and confectionery, ices; honey, treacle; yeast baking powder; salt, mustard vinegar, sauces used as condiments; spices; ice; sandwiches; prepared meals; pizzas, pies and pasta dishes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 4, 2013 | 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 4, 2013 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2013 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2013 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2013 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2013 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2013 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 18, 2013 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Feb 6, 2013 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 2013 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 2013 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 10, 2013 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2013 | 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 9, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 9, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 9, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 2012 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Feb 29, 2012 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 25, 2012 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |