USPTO serial 86544832
LEILA LOU
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DAHLING, KRISTIN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 LEILA LOU?
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.
DOUGLAS M. KAUTZKY,
DOUGLAS M. KAUTZKY, Law Offices Of Douglas M Kautzky3858 W Carson St Ste 208Torrance, CA 90503-6705UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 004 | Aromatherapy fragrance candles; Bougies in the nature of wax candles; Candle torches; Candles; Candles and wicks for candles for lighting; Candles for lighting; Candles for night lights; Perfumed candles; Scented candles; Scented wax for use in candle warmers; Tea light candles; Votive candles; Wicks for candles; Wicks for candles for lighting | PARTIALLY PAID | Jan 1, 2008 |
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 13, 2016 | 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 13, 2016 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2015 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 2, 2015 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 2, 2015 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 2, 2015 | RFTP | REMOVED FROM TEAS PLUS | — |
| Jun 1, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 10, 2015 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 27, 2015 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |