A trademark registration is only as useful as its ability to withstand scrutiny in the event of a dispute. If there are issues that can lead to its cancellation, those issues will likely be discovered by the other party and provide them with serious leverage.
This article uses the TRUMP trademark registration for sneakers as a real life example of an existing registration that is highly unlikely to hold up in the event of a dispute. If it were ever re-examined, it ought to be cancelled. Interestingly, anyone can petition the USPTO to re-examine a trademark registration. If you'd like to be the person who initiates the process leading to the cancellation of one of Donald Trump's trademarks, you can be.
Here is what happened, why it matters, and what it means for anyone who owns or is thinking about registering a trademark.
The TRUMP Sneaker Registration
On June 26, 2024, DTTM Operations LLC, a Donald Trump intellectual property holding company, filed an application to register TRUMP as a trademark for sneakers. The application was filed on a Section 1(a) basis, meaning the applicant declared that the trademark was already in use in commerce as of the filing date. The application was examined in late January 2025, sailed through without objection, and the trademark was registered on April 15, 2025, as U.S. Registration No. 7758981.
There is, however, a critical problem with the specimen submitted to support that registration. It showed that the trademark wasn't in use in commerce as of the date required by law.
What "Use in Commerce" Actually Means
Under U.S. trademark law, there are two ways to file a trademark application when no foreign rights are involved.
Section 1(a) is for applicants already using their trademark in commerce in connection with the goods listed in the application as of the filing date. Section 1(b) is for applicants who are not yet using their trademark in commerce but who intend to do so. Applicants filing under Section 1(b) cannot obtain registration until they have actually begun using the mark in commerce and file the required follow-up documentation.
DTTM Operations chose Section 1(a). By doing so, it represented to the USPTO that the TRUMP trademark was already in use in commerce in connection with sneakers on June 26, 2024. That representation is not a formality. It is a legal requirement, and the validity of the registration depends on whether it is true.
How the USPTO Evaluates Use in Commerce
The USPTO does not independently verify use in commerce. Instead, it relies on a signed declaration from the applicant and a specimen showing the trademark being used in connection with the goods. If the specimen appears compliant and the declaration is properly executed, the USPTO accepts that the use in commerce requirement is satisfied and moves the application forward.
To evaluate whether a specimen is compliant, examining attorneys follow the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, known as the TMEP. The TMEP provides detailed guidance on what qualifies as acceptable use in commerce and what does not.
The Problem With the Specimen
The specimen submitted for the TRUMP application consisted of three screenshots from gettrumpsneakers.com. A website screenshot showing goods being sold in connection with a trademark is a standard and generally acceptable type of specimen. The problem was in the details.
Page one of the specimen explicitly stated that the goods were only "estimated to ship in July 2024." Page two described the transaction as a "pre-order." In other words, as of the June 26, 2024 filing date, the sneakers were not available for purchase and delivery. They were available only for advance ordering, with fulfillment promised at a future date.
What the TMEP Says About Pre-Orders
TMEP Section 904 is unambiguous on this point. It states that in examining a specimen filed with an application under Section 1(a), the examining attorney must refuse registration if the specimen indicates that the goods have not been sold or transported in commerce. The TMEP goes on to specifically address the situation at issue here, stating that a webpage for placing pre-sale orders for goods that are not yet available does not show use of the mark in commerce in connection with the goods, even if it otherwise meets the requirements for an acceptable display associated with the goods.
Under that standard, the examining attorney was required to refuse registration and issue an office action. DTTM Operations could then have amended the filing basis from Section 1(a) to Section 1(b), which would have allowed it to proceed toward registration once the sneakers were actually available for sale and shipment. That is the correct path when goods are not yet on the market.
That is not what happened. The application was approved for publication and eventually registered without any objection from the USPTO.
What Can Be Done
A registration does not become untouchable once it issues. Within the first five years after registration, in this case until April 15, 2030, any member of the public can petition the USPTO to re-examine the application by filing a request and paying a $400 fee. If the petition establishes a prima facie case of non-use as of the application filing date, the USPTO may re-examine the application and, if it finds the registration was improperly granted, cancel it.
Based on the publicly available specimen, establishing that prima facie case appears straightforward.
The Broader Lesson
Whether the TRUMP sneaker registration ultimately survives is an open question that depends on whether someone files that petition and how the USPTO responds. But the more important point is what this situation illustrates about trademark registration generally.
A registration certificate reflects the USPTO's satisfaction with your application at the time of filing. It does not mean your registration is immune from challenge. If a dispute ever arises, the opposing party is going to examine every element of your registration closely: the filing date, the specimen, the claimed first use date, the accuracy of the goods description. If any of those facts do not hold up under scrutiny, the registration can be challenged and potentially cancelled.
This is why the quality of a trademark filing matters as much as the fact of it. The goal is not simply to get past the USPTO examiner. The goal is to end up with a registration that can withstand real adversarial pressure when it counts.
Jared Spindel is a trademark attorney and CFA at Five Dogs Law, a remote U.S. trademark law practice. This article is the first in an ongoing series analyzing registered trademarks connected to Donald Trump.
.svg)