USPTO serial 77243778
UNDERWATER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MACFARLANE, JAMES W
- 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 UNDERWATER?
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
Long Island City, NY
Long Island City, NY
LONG ISLAND CITY, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ELyse A. Marcus
Elyse A. Marcus Day Pitney LLP7 Times SquareNew York, NY 10036-7311UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | non-medicated hair care preparations, non-medicated hair styling preparations, hair shampoo, non-medicated skin care preparations, and cosmetics | 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 Profound Beauty Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Profound Beauty Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by MANA PRODUCTS, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Similar marks named UNDERWATER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 2011 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 13, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 6, 2010 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 2, 2010 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Jul 2, 2010 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 29, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 18, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 24, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 24, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 30, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2009 | 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 15, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 6, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 14, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 18, 2008 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 14, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Nov 5, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 4, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |