CopyMark Law Group
4.9/5
Drawing for LISSAGE

USPTO serial 76595663

LISSAGE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
FROMM, MARTHA L
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 LISSAGE?

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.
Trademark Monitoring
(312) 319-4460
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Start a new application
(312) 319-4460

Owner

Attorney of record

The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.

Kaushal R. Odedra

Ray Thomas, Jr. Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P.1030 15th Street NWSuite 400 EastWashington, DC 20005-1503

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
021Perfume atomizers sold empty, cosmetic brushes, eye brow brushes, hair brushes, nail brushes, shaving brushes, hair combs, compacts sold empty, all purposes portable household containers, cosmetic removing paper, cotton balls, dispensers for liquid soap, soap holders, sponge holders, perfume sprayers sold empty, powder puffs; sponges for cosmetic purposesACTIVE—

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

Latest event (MAB6): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Dec 28, 2009MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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.
Dec 28, 2009ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 28, 2009EX5GSOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED—
May 27, 2009EXT5SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED—
May 27, 2009MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Feb 18, 2009TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Oct 17, 2008EX4GSOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED—
Oct 15, 2008AITUCASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL—
Oct 10, 2008EXT4SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED—
Oct 10, 2008MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
May 20, 2008EX3GSOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED—
May 8, 2008EXT3SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED—
May 8, 2008MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jan 3, 2008EX2GSOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED—
Nov 27, 2007EXT2SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED—
Nov 27, 2007MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Aug 24, 2007EX1GSOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED—
May 23, 2007EXT1SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED—
May 23, 2007MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Nov 28, 2006NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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.
Sep 5, 2006PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Aug 16, 2006NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Jul 12, 2006PREVLAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED—
Jul 12, 2006ALIEASSIGNED TO LIE—
Jun 19, 2006CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Jun 10, 2006ACECAMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED—
May 3, 2006CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
May 3, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 28, 2006CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Mar 27, 2006CNFRFINAL REFUSAL WRITTENA 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.
Mar 6, 2006ACECAMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED—
Nov 2, 2005CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Nov 2, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Aug 3, 2005CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Aug 2, 2005CNSLSUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN—
Aug 2, 2005ACECAMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED—
Jul 21, 2005CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 21, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jan 21, 2005CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Jan 19, 2005CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION WRITTENA 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.
Jan 6, 2005DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jun 18, 2004NWAPNEW APPLICATION ENTERED—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance