USPTO serial 74427024
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Arthur D. Gray
ARTHUR D GRAY KENYON & KENYONONE BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10004UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | manicure, pedicure, facial, skin care and haircutting tools, namely tweezers, nail clippers, haircutting scissors, moustache scissors, nose and ear hair scissors, eyelash curlers, eyelash separators, cuticle and hangnail nippers, nail files, nail clippers, artificial nail cutters, callus cutters, callus rasps, whitehead and blackhead removers, nose hair trimmers, cuticle knives, hangnail clippers, and nail scissors | ABANDONED | Jun 1, 1989 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 20, 1997 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 20, 1997 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 5, 1996 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 1996 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 8, 1996 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 20, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 17, 1995 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 1994 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 22, 1994 | 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 13, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |