USPTO serial 76177273
DYNAMIC FOCUS PLUS AMERICAN FUND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCCAULEY, BRENDAN D
- 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 AMERICAN 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
1133 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 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. |
| Jun 8, 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. |
| Nov 10, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 10, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 7, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 7, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 20, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 29, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 29, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 28, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 28, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| 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 17, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 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 | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 7, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 23, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 18, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 18, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 13, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 4, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 11, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 19, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 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 | — |