USPTO serial 75448295
EYEMATIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BOAGNI, MARY
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with EYEMATIC?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MARY B SCOTT
MARY B SCOTT GRAY CARY WARE & FREIDENRICH401 B ST STE 1700SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4297UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer hardware and software for visual recognition of inanimate and animate objects, namely, humans, for a variety of applications, including facial recognition, avatar animation, gesture interfaces, video annotation, complex object recognition and three-dimensional reconstruction | ACTIVE | Oct 1, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 30, 2001 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Nov 19, 2000 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 11, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2000 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 18, 2000 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 15, 1999 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 14, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 12, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 2, 1998 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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 21, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |