Drawing for EUPHONIC AUDIO

USPTO serial 78059702

EUPHONIC AUDIO

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
Law office
FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)

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 EUPHONIC AUDIO?

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.

JAY FLEMMA

JAY FLEMMA RONALD S BIENSTOCK & ASSOCIATES PC250 W 57TH ST STE 1917NEW YORK, NY 10107UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009MUSICAL INSTRUMENT AMPLIFIERS AND COMPONENTS THEREFORE, NAMELY, AUDIO SPEAKERS, SPEAKER CABINETS, SPEAKER ENCLOSURES, SOUND AMPLIFIERS, PRE-AMPLIFIERS, SOUND PROCESSORS AND MODIFIERS, NAMELY DELAY, REVERB AND DISTORTION EFFECTS BOXES, BOTH FOOT OPERATED AND SPEAKER HEAD MOUNTED UNITS.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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Mar 25, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Mar 23, 2004ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Mar 23, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Mar 23, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Mar 23, 2004EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Jul 14, 2003CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
May 7, 2003EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Apr 30, 2003EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
Oct 4, 2002CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Sep 29, 2002PETGPETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED—
Jul 24, 2002PETRPETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED—
Jul 24, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jun 15, 2002ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
Jun 15, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Apr 24, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jul 30, 2001CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 24, 2001DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance