USPTO serial 73558368
SKIN PERFECTING CREME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- Nov 24, 1987
- Examiner
- CIPPARONE, MARY
- Law office
- SCANNING ON DEMAND
What this means
Status 710 means the registration was cancelled because a required Section 8 declaration of continued use was not filed within the deadline (including any grace period). The federal registration is no longer active. Evaluate filing a new application if you still use the mark, or petition if cancellation was erroneous. Consult counsel on remaining common-law rights.
Need help with SKIN PERFECTING CREME?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HORST H. WERDER
LESLEY A MORADISAN767 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10153UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | SKIN LOTIONS AND CREAMS | SECTION 8 - CANCELLED | Jul 26, 1985 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2008 | CAEX | CANCELLED SEC. 8 (10-YR)/EXPIRED SECTION 9 | — |
| Mar 14, 2007 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 8, 1993 | 8.OK | REGISTERED - SEC. 8 (6-YR) ACCEPTED | The USPTO accepted your Section 8 declaration showing the mark is still in use in commerce (or excusable nonuse). This satisfies the six-year maintenance requirement and keeps the registration active until the next renewal deadline. |
| Jan 8, 1993 | 815F | REGISTERED - SEC. 8 (6-YR) & SEC. 15 FILED | — |
| Nov 24, 1987 | R.SR | REGISTERED-SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | Your mark is registered on the Supplemental Register, which is available for marks that are not yet distinctive enough for the Principal Register but can still identify a source. Protection is more limited than Principal Register registration but can later support a Principal Register application. |
| Aug 27, 1987 | CNTA | APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 11, 1987 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 1, 1987 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 1987 | 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. |
| Apr 9, 1987 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 1986 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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 3, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 1985 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Dec 4, 1985 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |