USPTO serial 86228246
Serial No. 86228246
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HUDSON, TAMARA BREE
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 Serial No. 86228246?
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
City of Industry, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Anthony King
ANTHONY KING ARDENT LAW GROUP2600 MICHELSON DR STE 1700IRVINE, CA 92612-6535UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 043 | Cafe-restaurants; Restaurant; Restaurant services featuring soup served in a mini-wok, containing a variety of meats, seafood, vegetables and tofu | ACTIVE | Apr 1, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2016 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Mar 18, 2016 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2016 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Feb 29, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 29, 2016 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| May 27, 2015 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| May 27, 2015 | 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. |
| May 27, 2015 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2015 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 27, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 27, 2015 | 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. |
| Apr 27, 2015 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 27, 2015 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 27, 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 27, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2014 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2014 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2014 | 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 24, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 5, 2014 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 25, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |