USPTO serial 76155527
DUBAY TECHNOLOGIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINGLE, JAMES W
- 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 DUBAY TECHNOLOGIES?
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
Virginia Beach, VA
Virginia Beach, VA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kimberly A. Chasteen
KIMBERLY A CHASTEEN WILLIAMS MULLEN CLARK & DOBBINS1 OLD OYSTER POINT RD STE 210NEWPORT NEWS, VA 23602-7121UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic systems, namely, systems designed to emulate the binocular vision of the human eye comprising cameras, monitors, remote sensors and computer hardware; computer software, namely, software designed for image manipulation and complex calculations in the field of artificial vision emulation | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Surveying and engineering, namely, data analysis and manipulation using remote sensing, surveying, and imaging in conjunction with an artificial vision system used to emulate the binocular vision of the human eye | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 2003 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 3, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 31, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 31, 2002 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jul 31, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 2, 2002 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Apr 9, 2002 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Mar 20, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 14, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 9, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 2001 | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |