The U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board declined to register a hemp CBD company’s trademark, citing the federal prohibition of CBD and saying the product meets the definition of a drug but has not been approved by the FDA.
The U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) last week declined to register AgrotecHemp Corp.’s “PUREXXXCBD” as a trademark for dietary supplements containing CBD because the product is unlawful under federal law, according to a blog post from Harris Bricken’s Jihee Ahn. The company had sought the registration for goods identified as: “Plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes; vitamins; dietary supplements; all of the foregoing containing CBD solely derived from hemp containing no more than .3% THC on a dry weight basis.”
CLICK IMAGE TO SEE FILINGS
The TTAB found that AgrotecHemp did not have “a bona fide intent to lawfully use the proposed mark in commerce” because CBD is federally outlawed and that the products meet the definition of a drug and that drug has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
“Given that the goods will contain CBD as indicated by the identification of the goods and the mark itself, the fact that Applicant’s goods may be derived from ‘hulled hemp seeds, hemp seed protein, and hemp seed oil’ which may be generally recognized as safe does not obviate their unlawfulness under the FDCA. The FDA requires any product marketed with a claim of therapeutic benefit and containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds (such as CBD) to be approved for its intended use before it may be introduced into interstate commerce.” – Excerpt from TTAB ruling, via Ahn
The TTAB has previously declined to trademark CBD-related products and relied on a previous opinion in which it denied a trademark to PharmaCann.
“For applications based on Section 1(b) of the Trademark Act, such as the present application, if the record indicates that the identified goods include items that are unlawful as of the application filing date, actual lawful use in commerce is not possible, and any intent that the applicant has to use the mark on such goods is not the necessary bona fide intent to use the mark in lawful commerce,” the PharmaCann opinion states.
U.S. trademark agencies have repeatedly denied trademark applications for cannabis companies and have adjudicated several cases of alleged copyright infringement, ranging from hot sauce brands to candy brands.