USPTO serial 78412520
EUROPEANBODYART
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GAST, PAUL
- 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 EUROPEANBODYART?
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
Newport Beach, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence W. Horwitz
VICTOR M ESTRADA HORWITZ & CRONFOUR VENTURE STE 390IRVINE, CA 92618UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 044 | G 003 A 6/1/01 - topical spray used for cosmetic purposes | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2011 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Oct 17, 2011 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| May 17, 2007 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Feb 23, 2007 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 25, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 16, 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. |
| Oct 16, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | UNDC | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - COURTESY COPY MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 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. |
| Mar 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 17, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 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. |
| Feb 6, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 18, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 18, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Nov 30, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 10, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |