Christian Faith Fellowship Church v. Adidas AG
841 F.3d 986
| Fed. Cir. | 2016Background
- Christian Faith Fellowship Church (Zion, IL) sold "ADD A ZERO" apparel in 2005 as a fundraising effort and applied to federally register two marks based on actual use in commerce in March 2005.
- Church’s bookstore sold two marked hats in February 2005; a cancelled check from purchaser Charlotte Howard (with a Wisconsin address) and bookstore sales records were in the Church’s files.
- USPTO registered the Church’s marks; adidas later sought cancellation of those registrations before the TTAB, arguing lack of pre-registration use in commerce (plus other grounds the Board did not reach).
- The TTAB found the two-hat sale to an out-of-state resident was de minimis and did not constitute "use in commerce," and cancelled the Church’s marks.
- The Federal Circuit reviewed (1) admissibility and sufficiency of the check/residence evidence and (2) whether such a sale is regulable by Congress (i.e., satisfies § 1127’s definition of "commerce").
- The court reversed: it upheld admission of the check as a business record/commercial paper and held the intrastate sale to an out-of-state resident falls within Congress’s Commerce Clause power and thus qualifies as "use in commerce." The case was remanded for the Board to consider adidas’s other cancellation grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (adidas) | Defendant's Argument (Church) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the cancelled check and pre-printed address were admissible and support finding purchaser resided out of state | Check is hearsay/unauthed; address unreliable | Check is a Church business record and self-authenticating commercial paper; corroborated by sales ledger and testimony | Admissible under business-records exception and Fed. R. Evid. 902(9); substantial evidence supports Wisconsin residence finding |
| Whether an intrastate sale of marked goods to an out-of-state resident satisfies the Lanham Act’s "use in commerce" requirement | A single, minimal intrastate sale is de minimis and does not affect commerce regulable by Congress | Sale is an economic activity within the class Congress may regulate; de minimis characterization irrelevant under Commerce Clause aggregation doctrine | Sale is regulable by Congress and thus qualifies as "use in commerce" under § 1051(a); Board erred in applying a de minimis rule |
| Whether the Board correctly applied precedents (TTAB decisions like Cook/Bagel Factory) to require more than intrastate activity | TTAB precedent supports requiring more than merely intrastate sale | Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent reject a per se cross-state-movement requirement; Lanham Act defines commerce as all commerce Congress can regulate | Board misapplied Cook/Bagel Factory; precedents like Larry Harmon and Silenus Wines foreclose a bright-line requirement that goods cross state lines |
Key Cases Cited
- Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (aggregation/substantial-effects doctrine under Commerce Clause)
- Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (de minimis individual instances irrelevant where class of activity is regulable)
- Taylor v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2074 (aggregation approach; actual minimal effect not dispositive)
- Larry Harmon Pictures Corp. v. Williams Rest. Corp., 929 F.2d 662 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (Lanham Act extends to all commerce Congress may regulate; rejects percentage/threshold test)
- In re Silenus Wines, 557 F.2d 806 (CCPA 1977) (intrastate sale of imported goods can satisfy "use in commerce")