USPTO serial 76069661
ST. TROPEZ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 ST. TROPEZ?
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
Santa Clarita, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Marvin H. Kleinberg
MARVIN H KLEINBERG KLEINBERG & LERNER, LLP2049 CENTURY PARK E STE 1080LOS ANGELES, CA 90067UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | SUN TANNING PREPARATIONS, NAMELY, SUN TAN GEL, SUN TAN LOTION AND SUN TAN OIL, SKIN GELS, OILS AND LOTIONS FOR ACCELERATING TANS; SUN SCREENING PREPARATIONS; SUN TAN ACCELERATOR PRODUCTS AND PREPARATIONS; SKIN AND BODY CREAMS, SKIN AND BODY LOTIONS AND NON-MEDICATED SKIN AND BODY BALMS | ACTIVE | Jan 15, 1993 |
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 25, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 19, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 18, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Apr 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 17, 2003 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 16, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 29, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 9, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 23, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 3, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 1, 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. |
| Nov 22, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |