USPTO serial 76027096
LOCUS DIALOGUE SPEECHPORTAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WINTER, ELIZABETH
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - DOCKET CLERK
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 LOCUS DIALOGUE SPEECHPORTAL?
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
Montreal, Quebec H3B 1A7, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JAMES E. ROSINI
JAMES E ROSINI KENYON & KENYONONE BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | AUTOMATIC VOICE ACTIVATED SYSTEMS FOR THE TRANSFER OF TELEPHONE CALLS USING VOICE RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY COMPOSED OF AUTOMATIC SPEECH RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY, NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING TECHNOLOGY AND TEXT TO SPEECH TECHNOLOGY AND SOFTWARE ENABLING THE OPERATION OF THESE SYSTEMS USING THE VOICE RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 29, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 26, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 22, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 12, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 13, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 13, 2000 | 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 30, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 23, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |