USPTO serial 85124786
VATIKA DABUR NATURALS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 VATIKA DABUR NATURALS?
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
Fort, Mumbai, IN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jill J. Chalmers
JILL J. CHALMERS BRYAN CAVE LLP90 S CASCADE AVE STE 1300COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80903UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Hair cream; hot oil treatment cream for hair; hair care preparations and cosmetics | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4, 2018 | 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 3, 2018 | 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. |
| May 24, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 24, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 20, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 10, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 9, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 9, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 3, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 26, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 17, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 11, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 11, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 10, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 29, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 29, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 29, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 20, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 20, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 18, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 14, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 8, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 8, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 4, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 27, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 16, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 16, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 17, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 15, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 14, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 17, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 2010 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 11, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |