USPTO serial 78639102
SHOPAHOLIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AYALA, LOURDES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SHOPAHOLIC?
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.
Jack Smugler
AMANDA H WILCOX HAHN LOESER & PARKS LLPONE GOJO PLZ STE 300AKRON, OH 44311-1076UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Non-medicated lip gloss, lip cream, lip liner, and lipstick | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 8, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2009 | 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 22, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 11, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 7, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 5, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 22, 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 26, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 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 | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 21, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 12, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 7, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |