USPTO serial 76493503
LE REVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GEORGE, DAHLIA
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 LE REVE?
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.
LAURI S. THOMPSON
LAURI S THOMPSON GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP3773 HOWARD HUGHES PKWY STE 500 NLAS VEGAS, NV 89109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Cologne, perfumes, body lotion, non-medicated skin care products,namely skin lotion, skin soap and skin cleanser; non-medicated skincare preparations, facial lotion, bath and shower gels, bath oils, bath salts, bath soaps, aromatherapy products namely aromatherapy creams, aroma therapy lotions, aromatherapy oils; sun screens,suntan lotions, hair shampoo and conditioner, body powder, lip gloss and facial 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Jun 23, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 29, 2004 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2004 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 28, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 19, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| Aug 16, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |