USPTO serial 78930807
HOLY HOTTIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- COOPER, CHRISTINE H
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 HOLY HOTTIES?
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.
Owner
RIVERSIDE, CA
RIVERSIDE, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LARRY W. MCFARLAND
LARRY W MCFARLAND KEATS, MCFARLAND & WILSON LLP9720 WILSHIRE BLVD PHBEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212-2017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Lipsticks, lip gloss; hand creams, facial, body and hand lotions, body gels, shower gels, body oils, body powders, body exfoliants, body masks, body mask creams and lotions, shaving preparations, after shave lotions, shaving balm, shaving cream, shaving gel, perfume, body fragrances, eau de toilette, eau de perfume, toilette water, disposable wipes impregnated with chemicals or compounds for personal hygiene and household use, room fragrances, scented linen sprays and scented room sprays | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 13, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |