USPTO serial 76977570
AXCESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- 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 AXCESS?
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.
David B. Kirschstein
GENE BOLMARCICH LIZ CLAIBORNE INCONE CLAIBORNE AVENORTH BERGEN, NJ 07047UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | POTPOURRI, PERFUME, COLOGNE, TOILET SOAP, SKIN CREAM, FACE POWDER, SKIN CLEANSING CREAM, LIPSTICK, NAIL ENAMEL, SELF-TANNING LOTION, HAIR SHAMPOOS, HAIR CONDITIONERS, HAIR RINSES, PERFUMED TALCUM POWDER, SHAVING GEL, PERSONAL DEODORANT, AND SKIN SOAP | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by L.C. LICENSING, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by LIZ CLAIBORNE, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by L.C. LICENSING, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Similar marks named AXCESS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 21, 2008 | 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. |
| May 21, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2007 | 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 6, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 21, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 21, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 30, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 14, 2005 | CHPB | POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Nov 11, 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. |
| May 11, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 13, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 22, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Jan 20, 2004 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 8, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 10, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 2002 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 13, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |