USPTO serial 78720800
DURAPRINT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLOHM, LINDA
- 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 DURAPRINT?
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.
Sean D. Johnson
Sean D. Johnson INGRASSIA, FISHER, & LORENZ, P.C.7010 E. Cochise Rd.Scottsdale, AZ 85253UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Biometric security products, namely, electronic fingerprint sensor hardware | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2015 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2015 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 13, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 18, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Sep 15, 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. |
| Sep 13, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 25, 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. |
| Feb 21, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 13, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 13, 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. |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Nov 29, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 26, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 5, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 4, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 3, 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 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 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. |
| Mar 30, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |