USPTO serial 78639775
XNN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FINE, STEVEN
- 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 XNN?
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.
Edward LANGER
EDWARD LANGER SHIBOLETH, YISRAELI, ROBERTS & ZISMAN1PENN PLAZA, SUITE 2527NEW YORK, NY 10119UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | High efficiency ultralinear power amplifier for microwave signals | ACTIVE | Apr 2, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Aug 13, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Aug 4, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 4, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 21, 2008 | 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 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 9, 2007 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2007 | 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 9, 2007 | CNFR | SU - 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 8, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 25, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 2007 | 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 25, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 15, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 16, 2006 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Oct 10, 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. |
| May 2, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 21, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 21, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 7, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |