USPTO serial 78660654
BBD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EVANKO, PATRICIA MALESARDI
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 BBD?
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.
Deena R. Merlen
DEENA R MERLEN ESQ REAVIS PARENT LEHRER LLP41 MADISON AVE 41ST FLNEW YORK, NY 10010UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE IN THE FIELDS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ROBOTICS, namely, ARTIFICIAL DEVICES THAT CAN MODIFY THEIR OWN ACTIONS IN RESPONSE TO INPUTS FROM AND EVENTS IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT; SCIENTIFIC APPARATUS, NAMELY, TACTILE SENSING DEVICES AND CHEMICAL SENSING DEVICES; COGNITIVE DEVICES, NAMELY, DEVICES WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPONENTS, NAMELY, A MORPHOLOGY OR BODY PLAN THAT ALLOWS FOR ACTIVE EXPLORATION IN A REAL ENVIRONMENT, A BRAIN SIMULATION EMBEDDING DETAILED NEUROANATOMY AND NEURAL DYNAMICS, BOTH OF WHICH ARE BASED ON ANIMAL NERVOUS SYSTEMS, AND A VALUE SYSTEM THAT CONSTRAINS THE NEURAL DYNAMICS BY RESPONDING TO SALIENT ENVIRONMENTAL CUES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE IN SYNTHETIC NEURAL MODELING; COMPUTER SOFTWARE TO CONTROL AND OPERATE ARTIFICIAL DEVICES THAT CAN MODIFY THEIR OWN ACTIONS IN RESPONSE TO INPUTS FROM AND EVENTS IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR INTELLIGENT DEVICES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR THINKING MACHINES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE IN LEARNING MACHINES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DEVICES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR NEURALLY BASED MACHINES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR NAVIGATION OF UNMANNED VEHICLES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR RECOGNITION OF PATTERNS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR CATEGORIZATION OF INPUTS ACCORDING TO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE OR PREVIOUS TRAINING; HARDWARE IN THE FIELDS OF SYNTHETIC NEURAL MODELING; SCIENTIFIC APPARATUS, NAMELY, RECOGNITION AUTOMATA, NAMELY, SYSTEMS TO RECOGNIZE PATTERNS AND CATEGORIZE INPUTS ACCORDING TO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE OR TRAINING; COMPUTER OPERATING PROGRAMS; CENTRAL PROCESSING UNITS; COMPUTER HARDWARE; GATEWAY ROUTERS IN THE NATURE OF COMPUTER CONTROL HARDWARE; COMPUTER NETWORKING HARDWARE; COMPUTER MEMORY HARDWARE; ROBOTS FOR USE IN UNMANNED VEHICLES; ROBOTS WITH INTELLIGENT LEARNING CAPACITY; ROBOTS FOR PERSONAL OR HOBBY USE; LABORATORY ROBOTS; ROBOTS THAT ARE NEURALLY BASED MACHINES; ROBOTS THAT ARE THINKING MACHINES; ROBOTS THAT ARE COGNITIVE DEVICES; ELECTRONIC AND OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS INSTRUMENTS AND COMPONENTS, NAMELY, OPTICAL TRANSMITTERS, OPTICAL TRANSCEIVERS, OPTICAL RECEIVERS, AND DIGITAL TRANSMITTER; ELECTRONIC CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR MACHINES; ELECTRICAL CONTROLLING DEVICES, NAMELY, CONTROLLERS FOR UNMANNED VEHICLES; ELECTRICAL CONTROLLING DEVICES, NAMELY, CONTROLLERS FOR ROBOTS; DEVICES WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPONENTS, NAMELY, A MORPHOLOGY OR BODY PLAN THAT ALLOWS FOR ACTIVE EXPLORATION IN A REAL ENVIRONMENT, A BRAIN SIMULATION EMBEDDING DETAILED NEUROANATOMY AND NEURAL DYNAMICS, BOTH OF WHICH ARE BASED ON ANIMAL NERVOUS SYSTEMS, AND A VALUE SYSTEM THAT CONSTRAINS THE NEURAL DYNAMICS BY RESPONDING TO SALIENT ENVIRONMENTAL CUES | ACTIVE | Aug 20, 2010 |
| 042 | SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CONSULTATION; PRODUCT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; DESIGN AND TESTING FOR NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; RESEARCH RELATING TO SYNTHETIC NEURAL MODELING; RESEARCH RELATING TO SELECTIVE NETWORKS AND RECOGNITION AUTOMATA; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF NEUROSCIENCES; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF INTELLIGENCE; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT RELATING TO ARTIFICIAL DEVICES THAT CAN MODIFY THEIR OWN ACTIONS IN RESPONSE TO INPUTS FROM AND EVENTS IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF NEURALLY BASED MACHINES; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT RELATING TO BEHAVIORALLY BASED MODELING AND COMPUTATIONAL APPROACHES TO NEUROSCIENCE; RESEARCH RELATING TO DEVICES WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPONENTS, NAMELY, A MORPHOLOGY OR BODY PLAN THAT ALLOWS FOR ACTIVE EXPLORATION IN A REAL ENVIRONMENT, A BRAIN SIMULATION EMBEDDING DETAILED NEUROANATOMY AND NEURAL DYNAMICS, BOTH OF WHICH ARE BASED ON ANIMAL NERVOUS SYSTEMS, AND A VALUE SYSTEM THAT CONSTRAINS THE NEURAL DYNAMICS BY RESPONDING TO SALIENT ENVIRONMENTAL CUES; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF COMPUTERS; RESEARCH RELATING TO MECHANICAL ENGINEERING; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF ROBOTICS; RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF THINKING MACHINES; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; PROVIDING INFORMATION IN THE FIELD OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF NEUROSCIENCES; PROVIDING FACILITIES FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF NEURALLY BASED MACHINES; TECHNOLOGY CONSULTATION AND RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; TECHNOLOGY CONSULTATION AND RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF COGNITIVE MACHINES; TESTING OR RESEARCH ON MACHINES, APPARATUS AND INSTRUMENTS; COMPUTER HARDWARE DEVELOPMENT; COMPUTER SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT; DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION AND DATA BASES; DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SOFTWARE | ACTIVE | Aug 19, 2010 |
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 Neurosciences Research Foundation, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Neurosciences Research Foundation, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named BBD
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2011 | 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 25, 2011 | 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 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 27, 2010 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 20, 2010 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 19, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Feb 19, 2010 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Sep 15, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Aug 19, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 14, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 20, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2007 | 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 4, 2007 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 29, 2007 | 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. |
| May 9, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | MREI | NOTICE OF REINSTATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 4, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 4, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 27, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | 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 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 20, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |