USPTO serial 77307460
FASHION FLIPZ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LINCOSKI JR, JOHN T
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - MANAGING ATTORNEY
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 FASHION FLIPZ?
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
Toronto Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Edward M. Weisz
EDWARD M. WEISZ Cozen O'Connor277 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10172UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Girl's fashion products and accessories, namely, faux nails, nail polish, decorative stickers for nails, nail files, press-on adhesives for nails | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 27, 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. |
| Dec 27, 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. |
| Jul 25, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 6, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 27, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 28, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 6, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 31, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 7, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 4, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 4, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 2, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 30, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 12, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 14, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 14, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 14, 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 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |