Bona Fide Use in the Ordinary Course of Trade

The definition of use in commerce (

TMEP §901.01

) was amended by the

Trademark Law Revision Act of 1988 (TLRA), Public Law 100-667, 102 Stat. 3935, to

add the phrase “the bona fide use of a mark in the ordinary course of trade, and not

made merely to reserve a right in a mark.”  The primary purpose of the amendment was

to eliminate the practice of “token use,” or use made solely to reserve rights in a

mark.

The legislative history of the TLRA makes it clear that

the meaning of “use in the ordinary course of trade” will vary from one industry to

another.  The report of the House Judiciary Committee stated that:

While use made merely to reserve a right in a mark

will not meet this standard, the Committee recognizes that “the ordinary course

of trade” varies from industry to industry.  Thus, for example, it might be in

the ordinary course of trade for an industry that sells expensive or seasonal

products to make infrequent sales.  Similarly, a pharmaceutical company that

markets a drug to treat a rare disease will make correspondingly few sales in

the ordinary course of its trade; the company’s shipment to clinical

investigators during the Federal approval process will also be in its ordinary

course of trade....

H.R. Rep. No. 1028, 100th Cong. 2d Sess. 15 (1988).

The report of the Senate Judiciary Committee stated:

The committee intends that the revised definition of

“use in commerce” be interpreted flexibly so as to encompass various genuine,

but less traditional, trademark uses, such as those made in test markets,

infrequent sales of large or expensive items, or ongoing shipments of a new drug

to clinical investigators by a company awaiting FDA approval....

S. Rep. No. 515, 100th Cong. 2d Sess. 44-45 (1988).

See also Paramount Pictures Corp.

v. White,

31 USPQ2d 1768, 1774

n.8 (TTAB 1994) ,

aff’d,

108 F.3d 1392 (Fed. Cir. 1997)

(Table)

but less traditional, trademark uses, such as those made in test markets,

infrequent sales of large or expensive items, or ongoing shipments of a new drug

to clinical investigators by a company awaiting FDA approval....

S. Rep. No. 515, 100th Cong. 2d Sess. 44-45 (1988).

See also Paramount Pictures Corp.

v. White,

31 USPQ2d 1768, 1774

n.8 (TTAB 1994) ,

aff’d,

108 F.3d 1392 (Fed. Cir. 1997)

(Table).

Therefore, some factors to consider when determining

compliance with the statutory requirement for a “bona fide use of a mark in the

ordinary course of trade” are:  (1) the amount of use; (2) the nature or quality of

the transaction; and (3) what is typical use within a particular industry.

See Automedx Inc. v. Artivent Corp.,

95 USPQ2d 1976 (TTAB

2010) (finding sales of demonstration models of portable medical ventilators to

military constituted bona fide use of mark in commerce);

see also

Clorox Co. v. Salazar

, 108 USPQ2d

1083, 1086 (TTAB 2013)

(finding that applicant had not made bona fide use of its mark in

commerce, as applicant had not sold or transported goods bearing the mark in

commerce as of the application filing date).

Sporadic, casual, and nominal use does not meet the

standard of bona fide use of the mark in the ordinary course of trade necessary to

support registration.

Adamson Sys. Eng’g, Inc. v. Peavey Elecs.

Corp.

, 2023 USPQ2d 1293, at *10 (TTAB 2023) (finding that evidence

showing a purposeful drawing-down of domestic sales where sales fell to single

digits or zero sales year to year demonstrated only sporadic, casual, and nominal

use, which is insufficient to meet the standard of bona fide use in made in the

ordinary course of trade);

see also

Exec. Coach Builders, Inc. v. SPV Coach Co., Inc.

, 123 USPQ2d

1175, 1197 (TTAB 2017) (finding that use of the mark on a single trade show banner,

in domain names, and in displays referring to historical use of the mark on vehicles

were isolated, de minimis uses insufficient to constitute bona fide use of the mark

in the ordinary course of trade).