USPTO serial 78526824
DRAGONFLY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRODY, DANIEL S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 DRAGONFLY?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Edward M. Prince
EDWARD M PRINCE ALSTON & BIRD LLPTHE ATLANTIC BLDG950 F ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-1404Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 013 | AMMUNITION | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by GENERAL DYNAMICS ORDNANCE AND TACTICAL SYSTEMS - CANADA INC.
- Other trademarks owned by SNC Technologies Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 013
- Similar marks named DRAGONFLY
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 26, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 27, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 14, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 26, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |