USPTO serial 76067903
SMARTLENS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELENKER, ESTHER
- 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 SMARTLENS?
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
Woodland Hills, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Rosemary S. Tarlton
ROSEMARY S TARLTON MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP425 MARKET STSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2482UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | LENS ASSEMBLY, NAMELY, AN ELECTRONIC DISPLAY FOR PHOTOGRAPHIC AND CINEMATOGRAPHIC CAMERAS COMPRISED OF A SENSOR TO BE AFFIXED TO A CAMERA LENS AND A DISPLAY SCREEN FOR PROVIDING REAL-TIME VISUAL AND ELECTRONIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE MECHANICAL AND OPTICAL STATE OF CAMERA LENS SETTINGS, NAMELY, THE FOCAL LENGTH, FOCUS DISTANCE AND DEPTH OF FIELD | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 21, 2002 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 20, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 21, 2002 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 21, 2002 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Apr 11, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Mar 12, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 12, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 5, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2001 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2001 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 18, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 18, 2001 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 14, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |