USPTO serial 86428262
ROBIN SHEA 80% HEALTHY 20% INDULGENT 100% DELICIOUS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RICHARDS, SUSAN
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 ROBIN SHEA 80% HEALTHY 20% INDULGENT 100% DELICIOUS?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Cooking utensils, namely, Frying Pans, Sauté Pans, Dutch Ovens, Casseroles, Grilling Pans, Non-electric Griddles, Stock Pots, Soup Pots, Multi Pots in the nature of non-electric pots for cooking pasta with and steamers sold as unit, Saucepans, Saucier Pans; Cookware, namely, Roasting Pans; Household utensils, namely, Spatulas, Cooking Strainers, Turners, Pot and Pan Scrapers, Rolling Pins, Whisks, Graters for kitchen use, Skimmers, Kitchen Tongs, Sieves; Kitchen utensils, namely, Splatter Screens, Pouring and Straining Spouts; Scoops for serving or portioning liquid and solid food items, namely, coffee, cookie dough, flour, water, and oil | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 2017 | WOAG | WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED | — |
| Mar 23, 2017 | WOAR | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 20, 2017 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 20, 2017 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Aug 17, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2016 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 15, 2016 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2016 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 16, 2016 | NOAM | NOA E-MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 22, 2015 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2015 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 2, 2015 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 14, 2015 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 13, 2015 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 6, 2015 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 6, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 5, 2015 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2015 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2015 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 24, 2015 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 15, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 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. |
| May 5, 2015 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 5, 2015 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 5, 2015 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 14, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 14, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 14, 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. |
| Feb 10, 2015 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 10, 2015 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 10, 2015 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 6, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 28, 2014 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 23, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |