USPTO serial 77857383
NUDREMYL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORDOVA, RAUL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 NUDREMYL?
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
Calgary Alberta, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. Bevilacqua, Esquire
MICHAEL J. BEVILACQUA, ESQUIRE Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and DorrLLP60 State StreetBoston, MA 02109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | skin care preparations; antiaging, wound care, pre-post cosmetic procedures and skin renewal preparations | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 16, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 27, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 21, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 20, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 20, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 10, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 5, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 2, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 2, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 3, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 3, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 1, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 5, 2010 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Aug 5, 2010 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Feb 1, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 29, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |