USPTO serial 76491610
ELLIPTIC SEMICONDUCTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MAYERSCHOFF, GLENN
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 ELLIPTIC SEMICONDUCTOR?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
KRISTOPHER E. HALVORSON
KRISTOFER E HALVORSON THE HALVORSON LAW FIRM1757 E BASELINE RD STE 130GILBERT, AZ 85233UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | semiconductors; integrated circuits; integrated circuit designs including high-level design language representations and diagrams for integrated circuits of communications and security hardware, algorithms, and protocols; electronic design automation (EDA) computer software programs for design and analysis of electronic integrated circuits; integrated circuit layouts; integrated circuit design blocks; and integrated circuit design tools | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | integrated circuit design services; consulting services relating to integrated circuit design; and diagnostic testing of integrated circuits | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 2005 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 18, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Mar 3, 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. |
| Jan 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 31, 2003 | 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 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |