USPTO serial 76177271
DYNAMIC FOCUS PLUS CANADIAN FUND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- 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 FOCUS PLUS CANADIAN FUND?
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 M5H 4A9, 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 AVENUE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036-6710UNITED 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 2011 | 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 29, 2011 | 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, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 26, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 21, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 21, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 17, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 28, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 27, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 27, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 27, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 26, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 26, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 24, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 2, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 30, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 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. |
| Feb 12, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 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 | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 4, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 3, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 18, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 2, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 8, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 19, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |