USPTO serial 78274593
SOUTH BEACH SUN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DWYER, JOHN D
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 SOUTH BEACH SUN?
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.
Steven M. Weinberg and Susan M. Daly
STEVEN M WEINBERG & SUSAN M DALY GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP2375 E CAMELBACK RD STE 700PHOENIX, AZ 85016UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Sunscreen and sun block preparations, and non-medicated skin care preparations, namely moisturizers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2006 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| May 2, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 2, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| May 2, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| May 2, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Apr 13, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 29, 2004 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |