USPTO serial 79018362
PRIMROSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BALDWIN, SCOTT
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 PRIMROSE?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Hair shampoos, body shampoos, talcum powder for toilet use, hair oil, eau de toilette, body lotions (other than for medical purposes), roll-on deodorants (for toilet use), eau de Cologne, lipsticks; all aforesaid goods included in this class | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2016 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2016 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 7, 2007 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 24, 2007 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| May 24, 2007 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Jun 8, 2006 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 24, 2006 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| May 24, 2006 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| May 23, 2006 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| May 22, 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. |
| May 19, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 27, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |