USPTO serial 76574576
UNLOCKING THE POWER OF MOBILE DEVICES...AT THE SPEED OF TOUCH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAUNDERS, ANDREA DAWN
- 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 UNLOCKING THE POWER OF MOBILE DEVICES...AT THE SPEED OF TOUCH?
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.
Thomas B. Haverstock
THOMAS B HAVERSTOCK HAVERSTOCK & OWENS LLP162 N WOLFE RDSUNNYVALE, CA 94086UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic fingerprint image sensors used to detect and recognize fingerprints, and to control a computer cursor | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by ATRUA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by ATRUA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named UNLOCKING THE POWER OF MOBILE DEVICES...AT THE SPEED OF TOUCH
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 6, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 4, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 13, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 5, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 15, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 1, 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. |
| Aug 31, 2004 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Aug 31, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 23, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |