USPTO serial 78605215
THE BEST SKIN EVER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINGLE, JAMES W
- 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 THE BEST SKIN EVER?
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.
Robert L. Polwey
Robert L. Polwey Powley & Gibson, P.C.304 Hudson Street, 2nd FloorNew York, NY 10013UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Cosmetics; non-medicated creams for skin care and blemish control; skin preparations, namely, skin moisturizers, skin creams, skin lotions, daily skin moisturizer, night cream, day cream, moisturizing milks, lotions, and gels for the face, the body and the hands, skin clarifiers, skin emollients, skin texturizers, skin toners; cleansing milks, lotions, and gels for the face, the body and the hands; skin cleansing wipes and pads; make-up remover; body and face care preparations, namely, body wash and body soap, body scrubs, body milks, face and body creams, face and body lotions, facial care preparations, namely, masks, milks, and beauty serums; bath preparations, namely, foaming bath preparations, bath gels, bath lotions, bath milks, bath oils, bath pearls, bath powder, bath salts; eye care preparations, namely, eye creams, eye gels, eye lotions; lip care preparations, namely, lip liner, lip balm, face powder, bronzer, blusher; sun and tanning cosmetics, namely, self-tanning milk, pre-sunning milk, sun care lotions, after sun moisturizers, anti-sun wrinkle creams, total sunscreen, high protection sun creams, and moisturizing tanning milks, after sun creams and lotions; non-medicated skin preparations to protect skin against the environment, namely, sun block, lotions, and creams that provide protection against environmental factors including sun damage, air pollution and cigarette smoke; anti-wrinkle preparations, namely, anti-wrinkle creams, gels and lotions; non-medicated cosmetics, namely, scar concealers; non-medicated cosmetics, namely, stretch mark concealing cream; personal products, namely, essential oils for personal use; pumice stones for personal use; cotton sticks for cosmetic purposes, cotton swabs for cosmetic purposes, and wool swabs for non-medical purposes; hand creams, lotions, and soaps; shaving preparations, namely, shaving balms, creams, emulsions, gels, and lotions, after shave balms, creams, emulsions, gels, and lotions; non-medicated acne treatment preparations, namely, acne control preparation kits comprised of non-medicated acne treatment preparations, facial cleansers, facial washes, facial toners, facial gels, facial moisturizing creams, cosmetic pads, and cosmetic facial blotting papers; perfumes, perfume oils, eau de toilette, and non-medicated body powder | 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 BETTYBEAUTY, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by BETTYBEAUTY, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Lulu Hornbaker, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Similar marks named THE BEST SKIN EVER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 12, 2010 | 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 12, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 17, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 15, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 15, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 15, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 11, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 12, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 12, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 12, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 12, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 12, 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 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 20, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 12, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 21, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Aug 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 10, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Jun 7, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 15, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 15, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 12, 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. |
| Nov 12, 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. |
| Nov 5, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |