USPTO serial 78297381
DIFFERENTIAL CLEARANCE TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAIN, CATHERINE P
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 DIFFERENTIAL CLEARANCE TECHNOLOGY?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Printed circuit boards | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Teradyne, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Teradyne, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by AMPHENOL CORPORATION
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named DIFFERENTIAL CLEARANCE TECHNOLOGY
- Prosecution event ARAA explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| May 10, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 11, 2006 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 13, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 9, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2004 | 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. |
| Aug 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 8, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 8, 2004 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |