USPTO serial 76290204
ENLIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRECKENFELD, WILLIAM G
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 ENLIGHT?
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
Ramat-Gan 52522, IL
Ramat-Gan 52522, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
WILLIAM H. DIPPERT
WILLIAM H DIPPERT WOLF BLOCK SCHORR SOLIS-COHEN LLP250 PARK AVE 10TH FLNEW YORK, NY 10177UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electro-optical digital service processing components for hybrid signal processing systems, namely a super-computing optical data processor to be integrated into a larger customer data processing system | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2007 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 8, 2006 | 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. |
| May 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 29, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 24, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 17, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 17, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 17, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 17, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 1, 2005 | 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 1, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 27, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 30, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 17, 2004 | 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 15, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Nov 22, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | 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. |
| May 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 28, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Sep 12, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |