USPTO serial 78268278
PALMOLIVE AROMA CREME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BALDWIN, SCOTT
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 PALMOLIVE AROMA CREME?
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.
Anita K. Yeung
ANITA K YEUNG COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY300 PARK AVENEW YORK, NY 10022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Personal care products, namely, skin cleansing preparations, hair care preparations, body lotions, oils and creams | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 26, 2005 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 26, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 23, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2004 | LIEC | LEGAL INSTRUMENT EXAMINER (LIE) - CORRECTION | — |
| Jul 2, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 20, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 19, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |