USPTO serial 78147804
LASER BANK ON A CHIP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TAYLOR, DAVID T
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with LASER BANK ON A CHIP?
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.
Owner
Richmond Hill, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Danial A. Scola
DANIEL A SCOLA HOFFMANN & BARON, LLP6900 JERICHO TPKESYOSSET, NY 11791UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telecommunications wares, namely, optical signal generators, optical signal receivers, optical signal transmitters, optical amplifiers, and replacement parts therefor, optical waveguide devices, and optical signal modulators.; Telecommunications wares, namely, optical signal generators, optical signal receivers, optical signal transmitters, optical amplifiers, and replacement parts therefor, optical waveguide devices, and optical signal modulators. | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 24, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 17, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 14, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2003 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Jun 5, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 24, 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. |
| Dec 2, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |