USPTO serial 76410226
PERFECT PEEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELLO, ZACK
- 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 PERFECT PEEL?
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.
Amy B. Goldsmith
AMY B GOLDSMITH GOTTLIEB, RACKMAN & REISMAN PC270 MADISON AVENEW YORK, NY 10016-0601UNITED 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.
- Other trademarks owned by THE HARTZ MOUNTAIN CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by THE HARTZ MOUNTAIN CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by RAPID BRANDS CORPORATION
- Other trademarks in Class 017
- Other trademarks in Class 021
- Similar marks named PERFECT PEEL
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 28, 2006 | 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 12, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 27, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 15, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 27, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 17, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 4, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 4, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Aug 5, 2004 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 25, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | 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 11, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 18, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 18, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Jan 29, 2003 | 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 12, 2002 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Sep 8, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 30, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |