USPTO serial 75751457
QI
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KOVALSKY, LAURA G
- 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 QI?
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.
HOWARD N. ARONSON
HOWARD N ARONSON LACKENBACH SIEGELP O BOX 416SCARSDALE, NY 10583-9998UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | SKIN CLEANSING CREAM, SKIN SOAP, SKIN CLEANSING LOTION, SKIN LOTION, SKIN TONER, SKIN LIGHTNER, SKIN CLARIFIERS, SKIN CREAM, BEAUTY MASKS, SUNSCREEN PREPARATION, MAKEUP, FOUNDATION MAKEUP, BATH GEL, BODY CREAM, BODY POWDER, BODY CREAM, BATH SALT, BATH POWDER | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | BEAUTY SALONS; HAIRDRESSING SALONS; PROVIDING FASHION INFORMATION; WRITTEN TEXT EDITING; HEALTH CARE; PHYSICAL THERAPY; COSMETICS RESEARCH; FOOD NUTRITION CONSULTATION | ACTIVE | — |
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 9, 2004 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 15, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 15, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| May 13, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 14, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Nov 11, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 15, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 21, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Sep 11, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Aug 22, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 12, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 6, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2001 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2000 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Aug 25, 2000 | 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 25, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 1999 | 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. |
| Nov 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 28, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |