USPTO serial 76207814
FINALE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RICHARDS, LESLIE
- 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 FINALE?
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
74172 Neckarsulm, DE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jonathan P Osha
JONATHAN P OSHA ROSENTHAL & OSHA LLPSTE 28001221 MCKINNEY STHOUSTON, TX 77010Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Perfume, essential oils for personal use, cosmetics | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 4, 2004 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 3, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 3, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 6, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 14, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 10, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 1, 2002 | 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. |
| May 4, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 13, 2001 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Dec 13, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |