USPTO serial 74408016
BEAUTIFUL GLOW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REIHNER, DAVID
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 BEAUTIFUL GLOW?
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.
Burton S. Ehrlich
BURTON S EHRLICH BREZINA & EHRLICH600 S FEDERAL ST STE 201CHICAGO, IL 60605UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | cosmetic products; namely, soaps, toilet soaps, bar soaps, liquid soaps, liquid toilet soaps, essential oils, skin care preparations, creams, cosmetic facial creams, astringents, depilatories, skin tone creams, skin lotions, moisturizers, cocoa butter creams and sticks, beauty bars, and facial scrubs; and hair care products; namely, shampoos, conditioners, straighteners, moisturizers, hair softeners, cream rinses, hair detanglers, hair dressings, hair stylers, hair lotions, hair sprays, hair cleansers, hair sheens, pomades, scalp treatments, dandruff treatments, curl activators, wave activators and hair relaxer preparations | ABANDONED | — |
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 20, 1994 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Aug 1, 1994 | 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, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 1994 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 17, 1993 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |