USPTO serial 77155888
COMPLEXE HYDRO-PRODUCTEUR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRAZIER, TAMARA G
- 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 COMPLEXE HYDRO-PRODUCTEUR?
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.
Howard N. Aronson
Howard N. Aronson LACKENBACH SIEGEL LLPOne Chase RoadLackenbach Siegel BuildingSCARSDALE, NY 10583Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | NON-MEDICATED SKIN CARE PREPARATIONS; HAIR CARE PREPARATIONS; BODY CARE PRODUCTS, NAMELY, BODY SOAPS, BODY CREAMS, BODY LOTIONS, BODY POWDERS, NON-MEDICATED DEODORANTS AND ANTI-PERSPIRANTS; NON-MEDICATED SUNCARE PRODUCTS, NAMELY, SUNSCREEN, SUN BLOCK AND SUN TANNING PREPARATIONS; PREPARATIONS TO PROTECT THE SKIN FROM THE SUN, NAMELY, NON-MEDICATED SUN CREAMS AND NON-MEDICATED AFTER-SUN LOTIONS; BATH PRODUCTS, NAMELY, BATH BEADS, BATH FOAM, BATH GELS, BATH LOTION, BATH OIL, BATH POWDER, AND NON-MEDICATED BATH SALTS; PERFUME, COLOGNE, COSMETICS AND MAKEUP | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | 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. |
| May 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 4, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 18, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 30, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 30, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2007 | 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 1, 2007 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 1, 2007 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 1, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jul 24, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |