USPTO serial 78005562
HOLOBEAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPPENFIELD, ANN
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 HOLOBEAM?
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.
STEPHEN B. SALAI
STEPHEN B SALAI HARTER, SECREST & EMERY LLP1600 BAUSCH & LOMB PLROCHESTER, NY 14604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | laser/optical based, free-space, optical telecommunications device, utilizing diffractive optics and holography for point to point transmission of voice, data, and video | 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 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 12, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 23, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 14, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 15, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 21, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 1, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 18, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 4, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 29, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 4, 2001 | 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. |
| Nov 6, 2000 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2000 | 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 5, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |