USPTO serial 78682683
SOUND SOLUTION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SALEM-HOWEY, AISHA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 SOUND SOLUTION?
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.
Harry B. Ray
HARRY B RAY HUSCH & EPPENBERGER LLC736 GEORGIA AVE STE 300CHATTANOOGA, TN 37402-2059UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | Sound absorbing flooring underlayment made of polyurethane foam and polyurethane foam with attached polyethylene film, sold only through distributors and retailers who specialize in floor covering products and who do not distribute or sell at retail acoustical ceiling and wall tiles for use in the building industry | ACTIVE | Feb 5, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 15, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 15, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 12, 2008 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | GNSN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| May 30, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 18, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 15, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 22, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 10, 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. |
| Nov 3, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 13, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Sep 18, 2006 | 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 18, 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. |
| Aug 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 19, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |