USPTO serial 75897369
DYNAMIC POWERFUL PERFORMANCE
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 POWERFUL PERFORMANCE?
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 AMERICANEW 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 1, 2009 | 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 1, 2009 | 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 3, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 3, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 3, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 3, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 15, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 15, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Jul 25, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 27, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jan 27, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 25, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 26, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 6, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 4, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 20, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 28, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 23, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 4, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 23, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 15, 2000 | 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. |
| Jul 25, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 21, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 16, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |