USPTO serial 78465915
LE TIGRE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MAKHDOOM, SAIMA
- 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 LE TIGRE?
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.
Howard N. Aronson
Howard N. Aronson LACKENBACH SIEGEL LLPONE CHASE ROADLACKENBACH SIEGEL BUILDINGSCARSDALE, NY 10583Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Cosmetics; perfumes; non-medicated skin care preparations; hair care products, namely, creams, lotions and gels used for cleaning, styling and maintaining hair | 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 LE TIGRE, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by LE TIGRE, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by KENNETH COLE PRODUCTIONS (LIC), LLC
- Other trademarks owned by LT2, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Similar marks named LE TIGRE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 1, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2011 | 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 6, 2011 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 4, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | 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 30, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | 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 4, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 17, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Apr 7, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Jul 1, 2008 | 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 8, 2008 | 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 19, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 4, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 4, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 7, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | MREI | NOTICE OF REINSTATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jan 15, 2008 | RGIA | REINSTATEMENT GRANTED - INADVERTENTLY ABANDONED | — |
| Jan 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2008 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Nov 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 19, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 25, 2007 | 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. |
| May 25, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| May 25, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 24, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 24, 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. |
| Nov 24, 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. |
| Nov 21, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 8, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 31, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 31, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 28, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2006 | 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 29, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 13, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 13, 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. |
| Sep 19, 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 17, 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. |
| Mar 17, 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. |
| Mar 15, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |