USPTO serial 78489897
MADINA SHEA SOLUTION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, LINDA M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 MADINA SHEA SOLUTION?
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.
C. Bruce Hamburg
C BRUCE HAMBURG JORDAN & HAMBURG LLP122 E 42ND ST FL 40NEW YORK, NY 10168-0002UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Hair care products, namely, shampoo, conditioner; skin care products, namely, soap, skin creams, skin moisturizers, skin lotions, deodorants, skin cleansers, skin oils | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Aug 14, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 29, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 4, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 4, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 2, 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. |
| May 2, 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. |
| Apr 27, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |