USPTO serial 78142743
HALLOO COMMUNICATIONS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMITH, REBECCA A
- 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 HALLOO COMMUNICATIONS?
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
South San Francisco, CA
South San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John J. Camozzi
JOHN J CAMOZZI DILLINGHAM & MURPHY LLP225 BUSH ST 6TH FLSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware and software in the field of interactive communications over computer and telecommunication networks, global computer communications networks, wide area networks, local area networks, Internet-Protocol-based and switch-based communication networks, cellular telephone networks, and public switched telephone networks using Internet Protocol, namely, hardware and software for sending and receiving interactive audio, video, text, and data transmissions over IP, Voice-over-IP, fax over IP, video over IP, and long distance call gateways using IP backbone; Computer hardware and software for interfacing communications equipment over computer and telecommunication networks using Internet Protocol, namely, telephones, cellular telephones, personal digital assistants, web cameras, radio transmitters and receivers, fax modems, personal computers, and servers; Computer hardware and software for user interfacing to configure and customize user account information and the features and functions of Interactive Voice Response systems, namely, automated telephone services, automated voice services, automated attendants, voice mail, and voice based information systems | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Jun 9, 2006 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 26, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 19, 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. |
| Apr 19, 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. |
| Feb 10, 2006 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2006 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 15, 2005 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Dec 13, 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. |
| Dec 13, 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. |
| Dec 7, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 5, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 10, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 29, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 12, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 28, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Feb 10, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 2, 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 25, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 19, 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. |
| Feb 10, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Oct 29, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 3, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 20, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 23, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 23, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jul 22, 2003 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Jun 25, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 17, 2003 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 9, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |