USPTO serial 78222081
AUTONOMIC NETWORKING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Reg. 3074851Status 711
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- Mar 28, 2006
- Examiner
- MACIOL II, EUGENE VALENTINE-JO
- Law office
- POST REGISTRATION
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 AUTONOMIC NETWORKING?
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
La Jolla, CA
La Jolla, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Pattric J. Rawlins
PATTRIC J RAWLINS PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES, ET AL.530 B ST STE 2100SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4496UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software for use in communication protocol stacks that facilitate data communications over wired and wireless networks; computer software for use in routing data communications over wired and wireless networks | SECTION 7(e) - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 2008 | C7.. | CANCELLED SECTION 7-TOTAL | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 14, 2008 | C7RF | REQUEST FOR SECT 7 TOTAL SURRENDER FILED | — |
| Nov 14, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 28, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | R.SR | REGISTERED-SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | Your mark is registered on the Supplemental Register, which is available for marks that are not yet distinctive enough for the Principal Register but can still identify a source. Protection is more limited than Principal Register registration but can later support a Principal Register application. |
| Feb 14, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | CNTA | APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| May 16, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| May 13, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| May 12, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Oct 6, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 23, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 30, 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. |
| Apr 28, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 28, 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. |
| Aug 22, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |