[E-trademarks] Use in Commerce for a service when underlying product was returned and refunded

[Cumbow, Bob]

I agree with Paul. As long as the product was shipped in commerce and the trademark was on the goods, the use was legitimate.


Bob
 Cumbow
Partner
Miller Nash LLP

605 5th Ave S, Ste 900 | Seattle, WA 98104
Direct: 206.777.7468 | 
Cell: 425.443.0990 | 
Office: 206.624.8300
Email | 
Bio | 
Insights
 | 
Website

Our attorneys regularly offer insights to address the challenges faced by our clients. To visit the Miller Nash industry-focused blog overview page on our updated website: please click this link. 

--------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the email. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us. Thank you.
--------------------------------------
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Paul Supnik via E-trademarks
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2025 2:24 PM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Paul Supnik <paul at supnik.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Use in Commerce for a service when underlying product was returned and refunded


[EXTERNAL MESSAGE: This email originated from outside of the firm. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.]

________________________________
If the original transaction was a legitimate arms length transaction, it was use in commerce.  I do not think that the return has anything to do with this issue.

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> on behalf of Frances Lippincott via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2025 2:17:49 PM
To: Carl Oppedahl <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Frances Lippincott <lippincottip at gmail.com<mailto:lippincottip at gmail.com>>
Subject: [E-trademarks] Use in Commerce for a service when underlying product was returned and refunded

Can an applicant use the date of first use in commerce for a service, where the service was performed but the underlying product was later returned and refunded?

For example, say applicant provides design services. Customer orders a custom light fixture. The light is delivered and paid for (date of first use in commerce), but then is later returned to the designer and the customer is refunded.

Thanks!


Frances (Flann) Lippincott
Lippincott IP LLC
475 Wall Street
Princeton, NJ 08540

Mail:
166 Valley St. Bldg 6M Ste 103
Providence, RI 02909
(908) 507-5507 mobile
flann at lippincottip.com<mailto:flann at lippincottip.com>
www.lippincottip.com<http://www.lippincottip.com>
Intellectual property transactions and litigation. Licensed in NJ. Federal Practice.
This email address is for non-firm use. Content is mere opinion and is not proffered as legal advice. Please use flann at lippincottip.com<mailto:flann at lippincottip.com> above for law-firm related correspondence. Thank you!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250423/ece0251e/attachment.html>