USPTO serial 78201881
HURON
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DE JONGE, KATHLEEN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116
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 HURON?
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.
DAVID MCGRATH
DAVID MCGRATH LAKE TEHCNOLOGY LIMITEDLEVEL 6, 136 CHALMERS STSURRY HILLS NSW, 2010AUSTRALIAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computers; computer hardware; computer software for audio signal processing; computer peripherals; Computer hardware and software for signal processing, audio and visual mixing, synthesizing, and recording, sound reinforcing, audio processing, virtual reality processing, fast fourier transform processing (FFT processing), auralisation processing, frequency domain processing, reverberation processing, audio equalization, and audio analysis; signal processors; audio and visual mixers, synthesisers, and recorders; sound reinforcers; audio processors; virtual reality processors; fast fourier transform processors (FFT processors); auralisation processors; frequency domain processors; reverberation processors; audio equalizers; audio analysers; and user manuals for use therewith sold as a unit | ACTIVE | Oct 31, 1994 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 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 26, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| 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. |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2004 | CNRT | 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. |
| Sep 29, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 23, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jun 27, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 24, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |