USPTO serial 79085044
BEAVER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HALMEN, KATHERINE E
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 BEAVER?
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 lotions; hair conditioner; cleansing facial milk; bath lotion; essential oils; perfumery; cosmetic preparations for baths; hair dyes; waving preparations for the hair; cosmetics | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2020 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2020 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Oct 24, 2012 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 16, 2012 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 23, 2012 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 23, 2012 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 18, 2012 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 18, 2012 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Sep 19, 2010 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 25, 2010 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 25, 2010 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Aug 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2010 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |