USPTO serial 78264910
REVERB MODELING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SCHRODY, ALLISON PAIGE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 REVERB MODELING?
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.
Joseph T. Kucala, Jr.
JOSEPH T KUCALA JR BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONEPO BOX 10395CHICAGO, IL 60610UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic audio reverberation processors, namely, software algorithms and related electronic hardware for audio reverberation in music | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 27, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | ATRQ | ATTORNEY REVIEW/DECISION ON AMENDMENT REQUIRED | — |
| Jul 5, 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. |
| Jul 5, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 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. |
| Sep 10, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Jan 5, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |