USPTO serial 75459449
DYNAMIC GUARANTEED MUTUAL FUNDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRASER, RICHARD
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 DYNAMIC GUARANTEED MUTUAL FUNDS?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MIDGE M HYMAN
MIDGE M HYMAN COWAN LIEBOWITZ & LATMAN PC1133 AVE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036-6799UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | managing mutual funds | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 13, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 13, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 29, 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. |
| Apr 24, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 9, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 24, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 13, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 7, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 26, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 7, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 1999 | 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 15, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 12, 1998 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |