USPTO serial 78687659
CONDITION SERIOUS VOLUME VOLUMIZING CONDITIONER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINKER, ANTHONY MICHAEL
- 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 CONDITION SERIOUS VOLUME VOLUMIZING CONDITIONER?
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
Linthicum Heights, MD
Linthicum Heights, MD
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Elisabeth Townsend Bridge
ELISABETH TOWNSEND BRIDGE WHYTE HIRSCHBOECK DUDEK SC555 E WELLS ST STE 1900MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-3819UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Hair care preparations | 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 Jonathan Product LLC
- Other trademarks owned by Jonathan Product LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Similar marks named CONDITION SERIOUS VOLUME VOLUMIZING CONDITIONER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2008 | 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 5, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 16, 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. |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 4, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 4, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 14, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 13, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Sep 1, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 21, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 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 1, 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. |
| Mar 1, 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. |
| Feb 27, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 12, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |