USPTO serial 79074191
RETORNA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROACH, APRIL K
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 RETORNA?
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.
Carlynn Ferguson, Dermot J. Horgan, Jeannine Rittenhouse, Gary S. Saposnik, Sean S. Swidler, Dmitriy Makarov, Amanda Peluse, Mark Nieds, Michael Kenaga, and Valerie Neymeyer-Tynkov
Carlynn Ferguson, Dermot J. Horgan, Jeannine Ritte IPHORGAN LTD.1130 LAKE COOK RD.STE 240BUFFALO GROVE, IL 60089Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Cosmetics; non-medicated anti-ageing preparations, namely facial creams | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2020 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2020 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Jan 27, 2012 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jan 11, 2012 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 11, 2012 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 30, 2011 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 13, 2011 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 13, 2011 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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 28, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 28, 2010 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 11, 2010 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Jun 10, 2010 | 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. |
| May 28, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 27, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 2010 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Dec 11, 2009 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Dec 10, 2009 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Dec 9, 2009 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Dec 8, 2009 | 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 8, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | LIMS | LIMITATION OF GOODS/SERVICES FROM IB ENTERED | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |