USPTO serial 78526834
DRAGONFLY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWELL, LINDA
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 31, 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. |
| Oct 31, 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 1, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 31, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 14, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Feb 13, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 7, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 13, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |