USPTO serial 77240121
HAIRTOPIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HETZEL, DANNEAN
- 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 HAIRTOPIA?
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
Mississauga, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John Alumit
JOHN ALUMIT PATEL & ALUMIT, PC16830 VENTURA BLVD STE 360ENCINO, CA 91436-1711UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Hair care products, namely, shampoos, conditioners, hairsprays, mousse, hair styling gels, and hair spritzers; body wash, body lotion, skin moisturizers, bubble bath, foam bath, liquid hand soap, foaming hand soap, and eau de toilette | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 22, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 20, 2010 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 20, 2010 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 7, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 21, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 9, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 8, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 1, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |