USPTO serial 78722472
FULFIL FACIAL IMPLANT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- IN, SUNG HYUN
- 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 FULFIL FACIAL IMPLANT?
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
FOSTER CITY, CA
Foster City, CA
Foster City, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karen S. Frank
Karen S. Frank Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk &Three Embarcadero Center, Seventh FloorSan Francisco, CA 94111UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Medical facial implants consisting of artificial materials used in plastic and reconstructive surgery, aesthetic surgery and cosmetic surgery | 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 EVERA MEDICAL, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Juva Medical
- Other trademarks owned by Juva Medical, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named FULFIL FACIAL IMPLANT
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Jul 7, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Jul 3, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| May 27, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 18, 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. |
| Jul 16, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 3, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 3, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 21, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Jul 3, 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. |
| May 2, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 1, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| May 1, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 1, 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. |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Mar 21, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 22, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 24, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 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. |
| Nov 21, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Mar 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 4, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |