USPTO serial 76309620
DISTRIBUTED VOICE ENGINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 DISTRIBUTED VOICE ENGINE?
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
Mountain View, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Heather A. Dunn
HEATHER A DUNN GRAY CARY WARE & FREIDENRICH LLP3340 HILLVIEW AVEPALO ALTO, CA 94304-1203UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Voice activated computer services, namely, providing voice activated search engines for obtaining data on a global computer network; technical support services, namely, voice activated troubleshooting computer navigation hardware and software problems related to global positioning devices via digital wireless telephones; computer services, namely, creating voice activated digital indexes of information, sites, and other resources available on computer networks; providing voice activated customized online web pages featuring user-defined digital information, which includes search engines and online web links to other web sites | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 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. |
| May 5, 2003 | 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. |
| May 5, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |