USPTO serial 78850286
BEAUTY IS ONLY SKIN DEEP, BUT STYLE IS IN THE "JEANS."
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINGLE, JAMES W
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 BEAUTY IS ONLY SKIN DEEP, BUT STYLE IS IN THE "JEANS."?
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.
Heather M. Hendrix
HEATHER M HENDRIX THE HENDRIX LAW OFFICE PLLC770 N MONTEREY ST STE FGILBERT, AZ 85233-3821UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail clothing boutiques; Retail clothing stores | ACTIVE | Sep 19, 2005 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2008 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Oct 1, 2008 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 2, 2007 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 13, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 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. |
| Sep 10, 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. |
| Sep 10, 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. |
| Sep 8, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 4, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |