USPTO serial 75459451
DYNAMIC GUARANTEED 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 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, ONTARION, CA
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.
- Other trademarks owned by DUNDEE CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by DUNDEE BANCORP, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Goodman & Company Ltd.
- Other trademarks in Class 036
- Similar marks named DYNAMIC GUARANTEED FUNDS
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 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 23, 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 26, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 26, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 25, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 22, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 21, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 19, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jun 19, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| May 21, 2007 | 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. |
| May 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 7, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 25, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 25, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 13, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 24, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 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 | — |