USPTO serial 78758161
SYMPATHETIC RESONANCE TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLISTON, JENNIFER LYNN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 SYMPATHETIC RESONANCE 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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. Hoisington, Esq.
MICHAEL J HOISINGTON ESQ HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP401 W A ST STE 2600SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-7913UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Apparatus in the nature of a device for dispensing a subtle energy treatment for the reduction of quantum noise in organic and inorganic materials for neutralizing the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields and other environmental stressors | 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 2, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 18, 2007 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | LOAP | LETTER OF ABANDONMENT PROCESSED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 23, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 8, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 8, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 26, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 26, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 25, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 29, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |