Days after celebrating her 70th birthday with a star-studded bash, Kris Jenner filed a trademark application for “Queen By Kris Jenner” through Jenner Communications Inc. The filing covers an extensive range of beauty products including perfumes, lotions, body oils, lip gloss, nail polish, and artificial eyelashes. This marks the matriarch’s entry into the beauty market already dominated by daughters Kylie Jenner (Kylie Cosmetics) and Kim Kardashian (KKW Beauty, now SKKN).
A Matriarch Enters Her Daughters’ Territory
Jenner Communications Inc. filed the “Queen By Kris Jenner” trademark on November 12, 2025. The timing positions Kris to launch a beauty line in a market where her daughters have built billion-dollar empires. Kylie Cosmetics, launched in 2015, commanded a $1.2 billion valuation when Coty acquired 51% in 2019. Kim’s KKW Beauty sold a majority stake to Coty for $200 million in 2020 before rebranding to SKKN.
The product categories span standard beauty offerings: perfumes, lotions, body oils, beauty masks, lip gloss, nail polish, and artificial eyelashes. Nothing signals differentiation from her daughters’ brands. Kylie built an empire on lip kits and makeup. SKKN focuses on skincare. Now Kris enters the same space with a brand name that directly references her persona rather than creating distinct identity.
The strategic positioning raises questions. At 70, Kris targets a different demographic than her daughters’ millennial and Gen-Z consumers. But does “Queen By Kris Jenner” distinguish itself from Kylie Cosmetics, SKKN, Khloe’s ventures, and Kourtney’s Poosh-affiliated products? The family has built beauty empire upon beauty empire. Whether the market needs another Kardashian-Jenner beauty brand remains to be seen.
How Intent-to-Use Applications Work
Trademark applications filed on an “intent to use” basis secure priority dates before commercial launch, but trigger obligations and deadlines most celebrities never discuss in their announcements. The USPTO offers two filing bases: use in commerce under Section 1(a), or intent to use under Section 1(b). The distinction determines what applicants must prove and when.
Intent-to-use applications allow filing before products hit shelves. You don’t need packaging, inventory, or final formulations. You need “bona fide intent” to use the mark in commerce within 3-4 years. That intent must be genuine. The USPTO rejects applications filed purely to block competitors without actual launch plans.
Filing on an intent-to-use basis creates a timeline that typically takes up to 18 months or longer for initial examination. After the USPTO examines the application and publishes it for opposition (approximately 12 months), applicants face a critical deadline: they must file a Statement of Use proving actual commercial use. That filing costs an additional $100 per class.
Launch delays become expensive. If products aren’t ready when the deadline arrives, you can request six-month extensions at $125 per class. You get up to five extensions, stretching the deadline 30 months beyond initial filing. Each extension costs money, and eventually you must prove actual use or abandon the application.
Specimens prove commercial use. For beauty products, acceptable specimens include product packaging showing the mark, retail displays, e-commerce screenshots capturing actual sales transactions, or advertising materials connected to product availability. The USPTO won’t accept mockups or prototypes. You must show the mark actually used in commerce with real customers buying real products.
The strategic advantage? Your filing date establishes priority over later applicants. Even if competitors launch products before you complete registration, your earlier filing date gives you superior rights assuming you eventually prove actual use. The risk? If you never launch, you’ve paid filing fees for nothing and potentially telegraphed your business strategy to competitors monitoring USPTO applications.
The Kardashian-Jenner Trademark Track Record
The Kardashian-Jenner family’s beauty trademark history reveals both the power and vulnerability of personal-name branding strategies. Kylie learned this when she attempted to register “KYLIE” and “KYLIE COSMETICS.” Both applications faced adverse examination and were withdrawn. The problem? Kylie Minogue held prior KYLIE trademark rights. Even Kylie Jenner’s massive Instagram following couldn’t override another celebrity’s earlier filing.
Kim’s experience demonstrated different risks. KKW Beauty required a complete rebrand to SKKN after her divorce from Kanye West. Building a beauty empire around initials referencing your married name creates obvious vulnerabilities. When the marriage ends, the brand name becomes a liability. Kim spent years and millions establishing KKW Beauty only to rebrand everything. New packaging. New marketing. New consumer education about what “SKKN” means.
These challenges stem from what brand strategists call the “synonymous strategy.” Celebrities name brands after themselves, maximizing association between person and products. Buy Kylie’s lip kit to be more like Kylie. The value proposition is simple and powerful. The vulnerability is equally clear. Your brand value rests on how consumers view you at any given moment. It leaves little room for brand evolution independent of personal reputation changes.
Contrast this with “style-reputation strategies” like Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty. The name connects to Rihanna without being synonymous with her personal identity. If Rihanna’s image shifts or she steps back from public life, Fenty Beauty retains independent brand equity. The Kardashian-Jenner approach doesn’t provide that flexibility.
Yet the family has aggressively protected their personal-name brands. When Kylie’s “rise and shine” video went viral, she filed trademark applications immediately for the phrase. Kim challenged later “KKW” applications to prevent customer confusion. They understand trademark protection. The question is whether they’ve learned from the limitations of synonymous branding.
“Queen By Kris Jenner” follows the family pattern. It ties brand identity directly to Kris’s persona. At 70, she’s launching in a market where age-appropriate beauty products for mature consumers remain underserved compared to youth-focused offerings dominating social media. That demographic differentiation could work. But it requires maintaining personal relevance in a beauty market obsessed with youth culture and TikTok trends. Can Kris sustain that relevance differently than her daughters? The brand name she chose doesn’t give her much room to find out.
Building Pre-Launch Trademark Protection
Filing trademark applications before product launch secures priority rights that prevent problems that derailed even celebrity applications. Kylie’s “KYLIE” application failed because Kylie Minogue filed first. That obstacle could have been identified through conducting a professional trademark search before investing in brand development. The principle applies whether you’re a global celebrity or startup beauty entrepreneur.
Beauty brands typically need protection across multiple trademark classes. Class 3 covers cosmetics and perfumes. Class 5 covers medicated skin care products. Class 21 covers cosmetic applicators like makeup brushes. Filing fees run $225-$600 per class depending on the TEAS form you use. Multiple classes mean multiple filing fees, plus that $100 per class Statement of Use fee if you file intent-to-use.
Personal names create special risks. Fame doesn’t guarantee trademark availability. Someone else may have already registered your name or a confusingly similar name in the same product categories. Professional clearance searches identify these obstacles while you still have flexibility to pivot.
Filing timing determines whether you use intent-to-use or use-in-commerce basis. If you’re still developing formulations and haven’t manufactured products, intent-to-use secures your filing date immediately. But remember those deadlines and extension fees. If product development takes 18 months, you’ll pay extension fees while finalizing launch.
Specimen preparation matters more than most beauty entrepreneurs realize. Plan packaging to prominently display your trademark. Design your e-commerce platform to capture clear screenshots showing the mark, product images, “add to cart” functionality, and checkout processes. These specimens prove actual use when you file your Statement of Use.
E-commerce presents particular requirements. “Coming soon” pages don’t prove use in commerce. Pre-order pages may not prove use if customers haven’t actually paid and received products. The USPTO wants evidence of completed transactions where customers paid money and received products bearing the mark.
Distinctiveness determines registerability. Generic terms describing products (like “moisturizer” or “lipstick”) can’t be registered. Descriptive terms merely describing product features face significant obstacles. Invented or arbitrary marks (like “Fenty” or “SKKN”) provide stronger protection.
Develop alternative brand names before you’re forced to rebrand. If your primary choice conflicts with existing registrations, having backup options prevents launch delays. This contingency planning costs nothing but saves everything if your first choice blocks.
Protecting Your Beauty Brand Before Launch
Celebrity beauty brands demonstrate how even famous names can face trademark obstacles without proper clearance. Filing fees starting at $225 per class become trivial compared to rebranding an entire product line after manufacturing thousands of units with packaging bearing an infringing mark. Your filing date establishes priority over later applicants, even competitors who launch products before you complete registration.
When I work with beauty entrepreneurs preparing to launch, I conduct clearance searches before they commit to brand names, assess whether intent-to-use or use-in-commerce filing better fits their timeline, and prepare applications covering all relevant product classes. The analysis includes evaluating potential conflicts, determining distinctiveness, and planning specimen documentation for commercial launch. This groundwork prevents the situations that derailed even celebrity applications.
If you’re developing a beauty brand or considering filing trademark applications before product launch, reach out for a consultation. Early trademark strategy protects your brand investment and prevents obstacles that can delay or derail market entry.
