USPTO serial 75543397
POWER MUTUAL FUNDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEN, LINDSEY HEATHER
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 POWER 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
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 | FINANCIAL SERVICES, NAMELY, MANAGEMENT OF 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2013 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 26, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 21, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 21, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 22, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 13, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 11, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 5, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 4, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 4, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 4, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 22, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 6, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 22, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 6, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 1, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 20, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 2, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 21, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 21, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 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 4, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 18, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 4, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 21, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 14, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 2, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 4, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 4, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 19, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 16, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2001 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2000 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 31, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 4, 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. |
| Jan 27, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 20, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |