USPTO serial 76163487
CLICK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUPP, TERRY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 CLICK?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HERBERT DUBNO
HERBERT DUBNO KARL F ROSS PC5676 RIVERDALE AVE BOX 900RIVERDALE, NY 10471-0900UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | COSMETICS, NAMELY, NAIL POLISH, NAIL POLISH REMOVER, EYE LINER, MASCARA, EYE SHADOW, LIP PENCIL, LIP LINER, LIPSTICK, FACE POWDER, FACE MAKEUP, BLUSH | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Mar 25, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 31, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 31, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 14, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 3, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 31, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 25, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |