USPTO serial 79204033
HDR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KUNG, KAELIE ELIZABETH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 HDR?
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.
Sarah G. Voeller
Sarah G. Voeller Hamre, Schumann, Mueller, and Larson, PC45 South 7th St., Suite 2700Minneapolis, MN 55402UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Cameras suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; cinematographic cameras suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; digital cameras suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; camcorders suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; video cameras suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; blank flash memory cards suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; electronic memory card readers suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; electronic memory card writers suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; computer software for video editing and video content management suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; computer application software for video editing and video content management suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; computers suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing; computer peripheral devices suitable for high dynamic range (HDR) image processing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2022 | ADCH | CHANGE OF NAME/ADDRESS REC'D FROM IB | — |
| May 21, 2022 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2019 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 7, 2019 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 7, 2019 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Sep 21, 2018 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Sep 5, 2018 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Sep 5, 2018 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 7, 2018 | 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. |
| Aug 7, 2018 | 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 2, 2018 | LIME | LIMITATION FROM THE IB - REQUEST EXAM REVIEW | — |
| Jul 27, 2018 | LIMG | LIMITATION OF GOODS RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Jun 20, 2018 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 9, 2018 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2018 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2018 | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 11, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 2017 | 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 8, 2017 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 23, 2017 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 23, 2017 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Aug 21, 2017 | 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. |
| Apr 7, 2017 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2017 | RFWR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) WITHDRAWN FOR REVIEW | — |
| Apr 5, 2017 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Apr 4, 2017 | 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. |
| Apr 3, 2017 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 3, 2017 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 31, 2017 | LIMI | LIMITATION FROM ORIGINAL APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Mar 30, 2017 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |