USPTO serial 78670560
GLAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BHANOT, KAPIL KUMAR
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 GLAM?
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.
David O. Johanson, Esq.
David O. Johanson, Esq. Bingham McCutchen LLPOne Federal StreetBoston, CA 02110UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Providing consumer information featuring product ratings of the consumer goods of others in the fields of apparel, fashion accessories, footwear, bags and handbags, jewelry, eyewear, and related accessories, beauty and skincare products, lotions, cosmetics, nail polish, fragrances, books, movies, music, housewares, electronics, pet goods, and greeting cards, and retailer locations, product descriptions, product availability, discounts and promotions, product features and purveyor reviews | 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 20, 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. |
| Sep 20, 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. |
| Feb 4, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 27, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Sep 10, 2009 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Aug 26, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 18, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 18, 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. |
| Apr 22, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | INCD | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR DIVISIONAL REQUEST | — |
| Apr 7, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 17, 2009 | PGDV | PETITION GRANTED - REQUEST TO DIVIDE FILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2009 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 19, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 13, 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. |
| Feb 19, 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. |
| Jan 8, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 27, 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. |
| Nov 7, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 8, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 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. |
| Mar 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 10, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 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. |
| Aug 14, 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 14, 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. |
| Jul 19, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 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. |
| Jan 17, 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. |
| Jan 17, 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. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 30, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |