USPTO serial 76522488
COMMONWEALTH CANADIAN FUND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ELTON, DAVID JONATHAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 COMMONWEALTH 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, P.C.1133 AVENUE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036-6799UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | MUTUAL FUND SERVICES, NAMELY MUTUAL FUND BROKERAGE, MUTUAL FUND DISTRIBUTION AND THE ADMINISTRATION AND 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2010 | 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 20, 2010 | 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 22, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 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 26, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 18, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 5, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 31, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 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. |
| 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 2, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 28, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 16, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 10, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 14, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 30, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 30, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 19, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 8, 2003 | 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 19, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |