USPTO serial 85006342
OOOHLALA OF BEVERLY HILLS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARTNER, JOHN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 OOOHLALA OF BEVERLY HILLS?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
R. Joseph Trojan
9250 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 325BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212-3376UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | (Based on Use in Commerce) Cosmetic and toilet preparations, namely, deodorant soap, bath gel, non-medicated bath salts, bubble bath, shower gel, sachets, body cream, hand cream, non-medicated lip balm, lip gloss, nail enamel, nail hardener, nail polish, nail polish base coat, nail polish top coat, body oil, bath oils, baby powder, and body powder | ACTIVE | Jul 1, 2001 |
| 004 | (Based on Intent to Use) Candles, scented candles, votive candles, and candles in the nature of tea lights | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 3, 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. |
| Feb 3, 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. |
| Jul 8, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jul 8, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 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. |
| Jul 8, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 10, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 8, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |