USPTO serial 87266285
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Abrasive sponges for scrubbing the skin; Appliances for removing make-up, electric; Appliances for removing make-up, non-electric; Automobile wheel cleaning brushes; Basting brushes; Bath brushes; Bath products, namely, body sponges; Bath products, namely, loofah sponges; Bath products, namely, natural sea sponges; Bottle gourds; Brushes for basting meat; Cleaning sponges; Coffee cups, tea cups and mugs; Cosmetic brushes; Decorative crystal prisms; Dispensers for facial tissues; Drip mats for tea; Electric hair combs; Electric hot combs; Eyebrow brushes; Facial buffing pads; Facial cleansing sponges; Facial sponges for applying make-up; Hair combs; Japanese style tea-serving pots (kyusu); Kettles; Kettles, non-electric; Make-up brushes; Make-up removing appliances; Manual cosmetic cleaners, namely, non-woven fabric wipes and sponges; Perfume bottles sold empty; Perfume burners; Perfume sprayers sold empty; Sponges used for applying make-up; Steamer baskets; Tea kettles; Tea pots; Tea sets; Combs; Electric hair combs; Electric make-up removing appliances; Japanese style tea-serving pots (kyusu); Non-electric hair straightening combs; Non-electric hair straightening combs; Non-electric kettles; Whistling kettles | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 2012 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2022 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE E-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. |
| May 9, 2022 | 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. |
| May 9, 2022 | 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 25, 2021 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2021 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2021 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2021 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 17, 2021 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 24, 2020 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 17, 2019 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 5, 2019 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 29, 2018 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 14, 2018 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 13, 2017 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 24, 2017 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| May 5, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 26, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 26, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 30, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2017 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 16, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2016 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |