USPTO serial 75885393
BLISS.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, CHRISTOPHER
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 BLISS.COM?
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.
David Ehrlich
David Ehrlich Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C.866 United Nations PlazaNew York, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 16, 2010 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Aug 16, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 21, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Feb 12, 2010 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 19, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Mar 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 19, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 30, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 18, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 17, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 8, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 2000 | 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. |