USPTO serial 78182522
PHOTOCLEARANCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MEIER, SHARON A
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 PHOTOCLEARANCE?
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.
Nickolas E. Westman
WESTMAN CHAMPLIN & KELLY- -NEW WESTMAN, CHAMPLIN & KELLY PA900 2ND AVE SOUTH- STE 1400 INTEMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-3319UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | SKIN TREATMENT MACHINE, NAMELY A MACHINE FOR REMOVING A LAYER OF SKIN | ACTIVE | Sep 8, 2004 |
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 12, 2005 | 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 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 29, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2005 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 14, 2005 | CNFR | SU - FINAL REFUSAL - WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Apr 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 5, 2004 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Oct 4, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Mar 9, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2003 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2003 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 14, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 9, 2002 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |