USPTO serial 78343378
PARTNERSHIP ROLLOVER FUNDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, CHRISTOPHER
- 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 PARTNERSHIP ROLLOVER 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
Toronto, Ontrario M5H 4A9, 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, P.C.1133 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10036-6799UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | MUTUAL FUND SERVICES, NAMELY, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Sep 16, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 1, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 1, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 29, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 27, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 21, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 31, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| 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. |
| Mar 28, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 12, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 6, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 6, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 23, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 1, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 18, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 8, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 23, 2004 | 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 21, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 8, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |