USPTO serial 74559737
DAILY HAIR ESSENTIALS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUPP, TERRY
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with DAILY HAIR ESSENTIALS?
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
Nutri-Metics International Holdings Pty. Ltd.
Balmain, New South Wales 2041, AU
Other trademarks owned by Nutri-Metics International Holdings Pty. Ltd.
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey L. Van Hoosear
JEFFREY L VAN HOOSEAR KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR LLP2040 MAIN ST 14TH FLIRVINE, CA 92614UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | hair spray gels, hair cleansers, hair shampoo, hair conditioners, hair moisturizers, deep-conditioning treatments for hair, hair revitalizers, leave-in conditioning treatments, and hair masques sold by authorized direct distribution | ABANDONED | Sep 11, 1991 |
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 8, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 30, 1996 | 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. |
| May 7, 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. |
| Mar 4, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Aug 28, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 28, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 18, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |