USPTO serial 78245138
EPILIQUE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEIMER, CAROLINE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 EPILIQUE?
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.
Kevin J. Harrington
KEVIN J HARRINGTON HARRINGTON, OCKO & MONK81 MAIN ST STE 215WHITE PLAINS, NY 10601UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | HAIR REMOVER, NAMELY DEPILATORY LOTIONS AND CREAMS | ACTIVE | Sep 15, 2003 |
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 21, 2006 | 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 21, 2006 | 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 12, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2006 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 12, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 20, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 2, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Nov 19, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |