USPTO serial 86305274
KITCHENEAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPRUILL, DARRYL M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 KITCHENEAT?
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.
George W. Lewis
GEORGE W. LEWIS WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP8500 Leesburg Pike, Ste. 7500Tysons, VA 22182UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Dinnerware made from acrylic, melamine, wood, stainless steel; metal, stoneware, porcelain, bone china, and glass, namely, plates, dishes, bowls, mugs, cups, and saucers; ceramic, namely, dishes, cups, and saucers; serving ware for serving food made from acrylic, melamine, wood, stainless steel; metal, stoneware, porcelain, ceramic, bone china, and glass, namely, serving platters, serving bowls, serving trays, ladles, sugar and creamer sets, salt and pepper shakers, and pitchers; drink ware and stemware made from glass and acrylic, namely, drinking glasses tumblers, goblets, pitchers, carafes, decanters, water glasses, wine glasses, champagne flutes, high ball beverage glasses, martini glasses, cocktail glasses, liqueur glasses, brandy glasses, and beer mugs; tabletop accessories made from acrylic, melamine, wood, stainless steel, metal, stoneware, porcelain, ceramic, bone china and glass, namely, tea pots, beverage tubs, beverage servers, namely, beverage and water bottles, goblets, jugs, decanters, pitchers and carafes; ice buckets, champagne coolers, cheese boards, oil and vinegar dispensers and bottles, bakers, namely, oven cookware, pie dishes, casseroles, ramekins, food and beverage jars, charger plates, gravy boats, food and beverage canister, tiered food servers, pedestal dishes, stands for dishes; egg platters and cups, salad tossers and serving utensils, namely, serving spoons, serving forks, salad serving spoons and forks and tongs, cutting boards, serving boards, and lazy susans | 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 15, 2019 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2019 | 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 14, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 6, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 6, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 6, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 28, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 28, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 27, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 27, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 27, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 23, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 22, 2017 | ATRV | ATTORNEY REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 17, 2017 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 16, 2017 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 15, 2017 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 15, 2017 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 13, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 13, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 12, 2017 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 12, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 25, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 30, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 18, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 16, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 9, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 9, 2015 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 3, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 27, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 4, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 19, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 21, 2014 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |