USPTO serial 78176132
PREDICTIVE FLOW CONTROL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLAYTON, CHERYL A
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 PREDICTIVE FLOW CONTROL?
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
81677 MUNCHEN, DE
Dietzenbach, DE
Dachau, DE
Dachau, DE
Dietzenbach, DE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
J. D. Harriman II
J. D. Harriman II Mary S. Mathew, Thelen LLP875 Third AveNew York, NY 10022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Apparatus and instruments for conducting, switching, transforming, accumulating, regulating or controlling electricity, namely, amplifier, antennas, transformers, electrical circuit boards, integrated circuits, and processor boards for mobile and non-mobile systems; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images, namely, digital cameras, mobile phones, mobile data receivers, computer hardware systems, and optical data carriers, pre-recorded magnetic data carriers in the field of software for mobile networks, mobile phones, network access control, and for accessing a global computer network, video recorders, and audio recorders; data processing equipment, namely, processors, digital signal processors, telecommunications hardware, namely gateways, switches and hubs for computer networks, quality of service analyzer for networks comprising embedded software designed to monitor and improve the quality and/or the speed of the transmitted voice or sound signals, firewalls for networks, load balancer for networks, and computers; computer programs and software for mobile networks, mobile phones, network access control, and for accessing a global computer network; components of digital networks, namely, antenna, switches for networks, hubs for networks, telecommunications hardware, namely, gateways for networks, computer hardware for billing operations in mobile networks, quality of service analyzer comprising embedded software designed to monitor and improve the quality and/or the speed of the transmitted voice or sound signals, and firewall security software | ACTIVE | Jun 11, 2001 |
| 038 | Telecommunication services, namely, providing mobile networks and quality of service in networks by monitoring and improving the quality and/or the speed of the transmitted voice or sound signal, and cellular telephone services, providing fiber optic network services, transmission of voice, data, images, audio, video and information via telephone, television, or global communication networks; personal communication services; pager services; providing multiple-user access to a global communications network; and transmission and broadcast of audio and video programming | ACTIVE | Jun 11, 2001 |
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 FG MICROTEC GMBH
- Other trademarks owned by Mirbaha, Bahid
- Other trademarks owned by Mirbaha, Ramin
- Other trademarks owned by Mirbaha, Ramin
- Other trademarks owned by Mirbaha, Bahid
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Similar marks named PREDICTIVE FLOW CONTROL
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 31, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 10, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 30, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 7, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2006 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 7, 2006 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2006 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Jun 7, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 7, 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. |
| Apr 14, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Feb 23, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 7, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 27, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 24, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 29, 2004 | 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 11, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 24, 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. |
| Mar 20, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |