USPTO serial 78368939
LIFE ENHANCEMENT SPA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOLDEN, JAMES B
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 LIFE ENHANCEMENT SPA?
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.
JENNIFER A. VAN KIRK
JENNIFER A. VAN KIRK LEWIS AND ROCA LLP40 N. CENTRAL AVENUESUITE 1900PHOENIX, AZ 85004Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 044 | Medical, nutritional and therapeutic counseling services relating to behavior modification and stress management; hair styling and skin care salon services; manicure and pedicure services; health spa services, namely, cosmetic body care services; massage; health spa services for health and wellness of the body and spirit offered at a health resort | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by CR LICENSE II, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by CR LICENSE II, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by CR SPA, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 044
- Similar marks named LIFE ENHANCEMENT SPA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 4, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 31, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 29, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 25, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 11, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 11, 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 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 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. |
| Sep 14, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 7, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |