DELTA
Bunge Oils, Inc.
| Research |
OneLook
Acronym Finder
|
| Serial Number | 78395517 |
| Mark Drawing Code | 4000: Illustration: Drawing with word(s)/letter(s)/number(s) in Block form |
| Attorney Name | Raymond M. Mehler |
| Attorney Docket Number | 0804-0477 |
| Law Office Assigned | L70 |
| Employee Name | STEIN, JAMES W |
Timeline
| 2004-04-02 | Application Filed |
| 2008-06-17 | Abandon |
| 2008-07-14 | Location: TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED |
| 2008-07-14 | Status: Dead/Abandoned |
| 2018-07-08 | Transaction Date |
Trademark Applicants & Owners
| Owner: |  BUNGE OILS, INC. |
| Address | 11720 BORMAN DRIVE ST. LOUIS DE 63146 |
| Legal Entity Type | Corporation |
| Legal Entity State | DE |
Documents
Click the blue "Refresh" button to load certificates, specimines, application, and other documents.
Attorney of Record
Good, Services, and Codes
| International Codes: | 29 |
| U.S. Codes: | 046 |
| Type Code | Type |
|---|---|
| GS0291 | Vegetable-based frying edible oils for institutional and industrial use only |
Trademark Filing History
| Description | Date | Event Coding |
|---|---|---|
| NEW APPLICATION ENTERED IN TRAM | 2004-04-12 | 1 NWAP I:Incoming Correspondence |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2004-10-24 | 2 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 2004-10-24 | 3 CNRT R:Renewal |
| NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED | 2004-10-24 | 4 GNRT F:First Action |
| TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 2005-04-20 | 5 TROA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2005-04-20 | 6 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | 2005-04-27 | 7 TEME I:Incoming Correspondence |
| FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 2005-05-12 | 8 CNFR R:Renewal |
| FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | 2005-05-12 | 9 GNFR O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | 2005-07-28 | 10 CNSL R:Renewal |
| LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | 2005-07-28 | 11 GNSL S: |
| TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 2005-10-31 | 12 TROA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2005-10-31 | 13 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | 2005-11-04 | 14 ACEC I:Incoming Correspondence |
| SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | 2005-11-07 | 15 CNSL R:Renewal |
| LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | 2005-11-07 | 16 GNSL S: |
| REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | 2006-05-10 | 17 RCSC S: |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2006-10-10 | 18 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | 2006-11-20 | 19 RCSC S: |
| ASSIGNED TO LIE | 2007-05-23 | 20 ALIE A:Allowance for Publication |
| REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | 2007-05-23 | 21 RCSC S: |
| LIE CHECKED SUSP - TO ATTY FOR ACTION | 2007-11-29 | 22 RCCK S: |
| ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | 2007-12-17 | 23 CNCF R:Renewal |
| CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | 2007-12-17 | 24 GNCF O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| NOTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | 2007-12-17 | 25 GNS1 O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | 2008-07-14 | 26 ABN2 O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 2008-07-14 | 27 MAB2 O:Outgoing Correspondence |
Similar Marks
uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.
While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.
| 