USPTO serial 76508259
MIRACLE LIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SALEMI, DOMINICK
- 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 MIRACLE LIGHT?
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
Swansea SA7 9EH, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert W. Sacoff
ROBERT W SACOFF PATTISHALL MCAULIFFE NEWBURY HILLIARD311 S WACKER DR STE 5000CHICAGO, IL 60606-6631UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Business management and organization consultancy, business management assistance; rental of medical, veterinary, and cosmetic equipment, namely, machines that emit intense pulsed light for use in medical, cosmetic veterinary, hygienic and hair depilation applications | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Education and training, namely, conducting classes on the use of intense pulsed light for medical, cosmetic, veterinary, hygienic and hair depilation applications | ACTIVE | — |
| 044 | Medical services; veterinary services; hygienic and beauty care for human beings or animals, hair depilation services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Sep 2, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 10, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 1, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |