Our Latest Blogs

Your brand is your most important asset. Dive into Indie Law’s resources to guide you through the maze of trademark law and keep your brand safe from copycats and infringers!

Can You Use a Virtual Mailbox or PO Box for a USPTO Trademark Application?

Navigating Address Choices for Trademark Applications

When you file a trademark application, the forms will ask for two separate addresses: your mailing address and your domicile address. For those working from home or running virtual businesses, this often leads to understandable privacy concerns and questions about what addresses are actually allowed.


What’s the Difference Between Mailing and Domicile Addresses?

  • Mailing Address:
    This is publicly available and used for correspondence tied to your trademark application. You can use a PO Box, UPS Store box, or virtual mailbox service for this purpose. It’s not required to represent your physical location.
  • Domicile Address:
    A domicile address is meant to reflect your true residency or your company’s principal headquarters. It remains confidential but is reviewed closely as part of the approval process. This is not simply a mailing address—it’s your real, physical location or that of your business.

Key Compliance Considerations

Recognizing Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies (CMRAs):

Listing a PO Box or a virtual mailbox as your domicile will almost always trigger extra scrutiny. The application process incorporates checks against U.S. Postal Service databases to identify Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies, and may include online searches using Google Maps or business directories to confirm your address is a bona fide home or business. If the address you provide is identified as a CMRA rather than an actual residence or worksite, you’ll be asked to provide an appropriate physical address before your application can move forward.​

Options for Privacy Exceptions:
In rare situations involving safety risks or other extraordinary circumstances, it’s possible to petition for privacy and keep your actual address off public records. You’ll need to submit a verified statement explaining the risks and reasons for your request, and if approved, you can meet the requirements while maintaining confidentiality of your home or office location.​


Acceptable Choices for Domicile

  • Your home address (protected unless filed incorrectly)
  • A physical office, studio, or warehouse you actually use
  • A coworking space (with supporting documents to show it’s your primary work location)
  • For virtual-only businesses, submit a thorough explanation and documentation if you genuinely have no fixed address, keeping in mind this option is rare and approval isn’t guaranteed

When Virtual Mailboxes Aren’t Permitted

Virtual mailbox services, PO Boxes, and similar CMRA addresses do not meet the standard for domicile. These will be flagged and lead to an office action—requiring you to supply a legitimate residence or business location.


International Domicile and Privacy

  • If your headquarters or primary residence is outside the country, you may need to hire local representation to file your trademark application.
  • If exceptional privacy is required, you can initiate the formal process for an address exception, but this is reserved for special cases.

Practical Guidance for Applicants

  • You’re allowed to use a virtual mailbox or PO Box only as your mailing address, not for domicile.
  • Addresses identified as CMRAs are routinely checked and flagged.
  • Privacy petitions exist for applicants facing genuine safety concerns.
  • Most individuals must supply their actual home address.
  • Choosing the wrong address type for domicile causes delays and extra review.

This content provides general information—not legal advice. Reading it doesn’t form an attorney-client relationship. For advice tailored to your situation, Indie Law Team can help you protect your brand and navigate these requirements.

 

Joey Vitale — CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joey Vitale

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney, Indie Law

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they've filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer.

Learn more →

Trademark Domicile Address Guide for Working From Home

If you’re working from home and applying for a trademark, it’s important to be aware of a key requirement: you must supply a “domicile” address that meets specific criteria. This rule affects individuals, small businesses, and entities using virtual offices. Here’s what it means and how to respond to questions about your domicile address.


What the Domicile Address Requirement Means

Every applicant must provide an actual domicile address. For individuals, this means your principal home. For a business or entity, it’s the main headquarters where leadership genuinely directs and controls operations.

If you provide only a PO box or a commercial mail-forwarding address, your application can be flagged for review or refusal. Courts have confirmed that using only a PO box is not sufficient. Where requirements cite specific cases or policy, consider including a brief citation for clarity and authority—such as case law upholding the need for a real address or linking to official examiner guidance.


Why This Matters for Remote Workers

Businesses today often operate out of home offices or coworking spaces. However, you can’t use a PO box or certain third-party addresses as your domicile.

If you’re an online business or sole proprietor working from home:

  • You must provide your actual residential street address (or for a business, the principal business address).
  • If a corporate applicant doesn’t have a fixed office, provide the name and address of a person with legal authority to bind the entity.
  • If your application doesn’t meet this requirement, it may be refused.

If you mention the option to petition to waive the domicile requirement, clarify that this is extremely rare and only granted in unique cases—such as significant safety risks, and subject to verified statements. This note helps readers understand how limited this option is.


How to Respond to Domicile Questions

Step-by-step:

  • Review any notice or inquiry to determine what the examiner is asking: is the address unacceptable or inconsistent?
  • Provide a suitable street address—either your home for individuals or main business location for entities.
  • If you used an unacceptable mailing address (like a PO box), update the record with your true domicile address. Your correspondence address can be different for privacy, but your underlying domicile must be correct.
  • If you truly lack a fixed location, file a petition with a verified statement explaining why you need an exception. Note again this step is seldom approved.
  • Be mindful of privacy: you can use a separate mailing address (like your attorney’s office) for public records, while keeping your home or principal address confidential.

Lessons Learned About Trademarks

  • A clear physical address is essential, even for virtual businesses.
  • Planning before filing saves time and money; verify your address meets criteria.
  • Domicile rules combat fraud and confirm applicant identity.
  • Using a separate correspondence address can improve privacy for home-based businesses.
  • Respond to address issues promptly. Unresolved problems can lead to application denial or abandonment.
  • Keep your records updated as your business moves or changes structure.
  • Consider legal advice if your situation doesn’t fit common domicile scenarios—small mistakes can delay or derail your application.

This article is meant to share general information, not legal advice. Reading it doesn’t create an attorney-client relationship. If you’d like tailored help protecting your brand, our Indie Law Team is here to guide you.

Joey Vitale — Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

About the Author

Joey Vitale, Esq.

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law®

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they’ve filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer. Learn more →

Trademark Infringement Case: Why Are Some “Buy Nothing” Facebook Groups Suddenly Disappearing?

Many Facebook groups using the Buy Nothing name were recently removed or forced to rename because the Buy Nothing Project enforced its trademark rights. Only a small percentage of groups were affected, but the impact was significant in some communities.


What Is the Buy Nothing Movement?

The Buy Nothing movement is a network of hyper-local gifting groups where neighbors give and receive items for free. No sales, no trades, no money. The goal is to reduce waste, build community support, and encourage reuse.


How the Groups Typically Work

  • Volunteers create local community groups
  • Members post items they want to give away
  • Members request items they need
  • Exchanges happen for free
  • Groups focus on neighborhoods rather than entire cities

Why Some Buy Nothing Groups Were Taken Down

The Buy Nothing Project secured trademark protection for the names Buy Nothing and Buy Nothing Project. Even if groups have informally used these names for years, long-term informal use does not protect them once trademark rights exist.

The organization publicly announced that unmanaged or unofficial groups using its name could be reported. After these reports, several groups were removed or restricted. Some large groups were reinstated after renaming.


What Counts as Trademark Infringement?

Trademark infringement happens when the average person may be confused about the source, sponsorship, or affiliation of a group using the name. For example, if an unofficial group uses the name, people might mistakenly believe it’s officially affiliated—even if that isn’t the case.


Why the Buy Nothing Project Took Action

The organization stated its trademarks help ensure:

  • Groups using the name follow the same mission and standards
  • People joining Buy Nothing groups are not confused about rules or expectations
  • The brand is protected from misuse or association with unrelated activities like selling, trading, or discount promotions

Why Some Community Admins Disagree

Many volunteer admins feel enforcement is too strict for communities built on generosity. Others say they did not receive enough warning before their groups were taken down. Members in areas facing financial strain or housing challenges also felt the timing added further stress to people relying on free-item networks.


  • Trademark rights apply even to nonprofit or volunteer groups if confusion is possible.
  • Long-term informal use of a name does not protect a group once trademark rights are in place.
  • Trademark owners are expected to enforce their rights, or they risk weakening those rights.
  • Whether infringement occurs depends on whether the average person could be confused about the group’s official status.
  • Platforms like Facebook act quickly when trademark claims are made.
  • Rebranding is often the easiest way for community groups to avoid future takedowns.
  • Strong trademarks help organizations protect mission, consistency, and reputation.

This article is meant to share general information, not legal advice. Reading it doesn’t create an attorney-client relationship. If you’d like tailored help protecting your brand, our Indie Law Team is here to guide you.

Joey Vitale — CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joey Vitale

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney, Indie Law

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they've filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer.

Learn more →

Can Mel Robbins Trademark “Let Them”? Understanding Trademark Limits

Mel Robbins, a well-known motivational speaker and author, recently attempted to register a trademark for the phrase “Let Them,” based on the title of her book and its associated message. However, this move has sparked significant discussion—not only about trademark law but also about the ethical considerations of claiming rights to common expressions.

This situation isn’t unique—LeBron James once attempted to trademark “Taco Tuesday” and was denied. Both cases highlight a crucial trademark principle: just because a phrase is widely recognized doesn’t mean you can claim exclusive rights to it. In this post, we’ll unpack what happened with Robbins and James, the importance of proving trademark use, and what entrepreneurs, influencers, and business owners should know about protecting their brands.


You Don’t “Trademark” a Phrase—You Claim Trademark Rights

One of the biggest misconceptions in discussions about Mel Robbins’ trademark attempt is the idea that someone can simply “trademark” a phrase. Legally speaking, when you apply for a trademark in the United States, you aren’t attempting to “get trademarked”—you are actually claiming trademark rights you already have.

In the U.S., trademark rights arise through actual use in commerce, meaning you must be using a phrase as a source identifier for goods or services before claiming exclusive rights. The application process with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is about securing additional legal protections for those existing rights—not magically granting you trademark ownership.

This distinction is key because many people assume filing a trademark application is like forming an LLC or purchasing a domain name, where you pay to “get” the thing you want. When you apply for a trademark registration, it’s more akin to an audition process—it’s about getting your existing trademark rights officially recognized by the government.


The Origins of “Let Them” and the Ethical Debate

While Robbins has popularized “Let Them” as a life philosophy, it’s important to acknowledge that the phrase did not originate with her. Many have pointed out similarities between Robbins’ use of the phrase and a 2022 poem titled “Let Them” by writer Cassie Phillips.

Phillips’ poem resonated widely on social media and in support groups, with its message about acceptance and letting go. Some have raised concerns that Robbins may have drawn inspiration from Phillips’ work without proper attribution. While Robbins has not directly addressed these concerns, this highlights a broader ethical question: Should public figures seek trademark rights for phrases that have already entered the cultural lexicon through other sources?

Legally, the USPTO does not evaluate the originality of a phrase in the same way that copyright law does. However, ethical considerations matter—especially when a phrase has deep public resonance before an influencer or celebrity attempts to brand it.


The “Failure to Function” Doctrine—Why Mel Robbins (and Many Others) Run Into Issues

One of the biggest obstacles for trademarking common phrases is the “failure to function” doctrine. The USPTO will refuse trademark applications if a phrase doesn’t function as a trademark—that is, if it doesn’t identify and distinguish the source of goods or services.

For example, if a phrase is widely used in everyday language (like “Let Them” or “Taco Tuesday”), it may not be perceived as a brand but rather as a generic or decorative expression. This is precisely why the USPTO has denied many trademark applications for common slogans, including:

  • LeBron James and “Taco Tuesday” – The USPTO ruled that this phrase was a common expression widely used by the public and therefore could not function as a trademark.
  • “OK, Boomer” – Trademark applications for this viral phrase were rejected for failing to function as a trademark, as it was a widely used cultural expression.
  • “Let’s Roll” – The USPTO denied an attempt to trademark this phrase in connection with 9/11 remembrance efforts because it was widely associated with a historical event rather than a brand.

Mel Robbins’ attempt to register “Let Them” faces similar hurdles. Since the phrase is common and widely used as a general life philosophy rather than a brand identifier, the USPTO may reject it under the failure-to-function doctrine.


Why a Book Title (Alone) Isn’t Enough for Trademark Rights

Another crucial aspect of Robbins’ trademark attempt is the misconception that a book title alone is enough to establish trademark rights.

Under U.S. trademark law, the title of a single book cannot be trademarked because it is not considered a brand identifier. A trademark must indicate a continuing commercial source, and a single book title does not serve that purpose. However, if the phrase were used as the name of a series of books (like “Harry Potter” or “Chicken Soup for the Soul”), then it could be eligible for trademark protection.

Similarly, just putting a phrase on an Etsy t-shirt or in a poem does not automatically create trademark rights. The phrase must be used as a brand—meaning it must identify the source of goods or services in a way that distinguishes it from competitors. This is why many attempts to trademark viral phrases or inspirational quotes fail.


What Is Trademark Usage? The “Hakuna Matata” Effect

In trademark law, trademark usage refers to the use of a word, phrase, symbol, or design in commerce to identify and distinguish the source of goods or services. This means that when consumers encounter the trademark, they should immediately associate it with a specific company or product. This association is known as source identification.

For instance, when you see the Apple logo, you think of Apple Inc. When you see the Nike swoosh, you think of Nike. This immediate recognition is the result of consistent and exclusive use of these symbols in connection with their respective products, establishing a strong link in the minds of consumers.

I like to call this the “Hakuna Matata Effect.” The phrase Hakuna Matata, which means “no worries” in Swahili, became widely associated with Disney’s The Lion King after the film’s release in 1994. Due to this strong association, Disney was able to trademark “Hakuna Matata” for use on T-shirts and other merchandise. This demonstrates how a phrase, through extensive use and public recognition, can function as a trademark by pointing directly to a single source—in this case, Disney.

For a word or phrase to function as a trademark that your business owns, it must create that same “Hakuna Matata Effect”—where the public hears the phrase and immediately connects it to your brand. Without that strong brand association, a phrase remains generic, descriptive, or merely ornamental, and does not qualify for trademark protection.


The Takeaway: Trademark Law Protects Brands, Not Common Expressions

Mel Robbins’ attempt to register “Let Them” as a trademark is a perfect example of why trademark law does not grant ownership over everyday phrases. Instead, trademarks are meant to protect brand identities—not popular sayings, life advice, or generic expressions.

If you’re an entrepreneur, influencer, or creative professional, here are some key lessons to keep in mind:

  • You don’t “trademark” something—you claim trademark rights based on actual use.
  • The USPTO frequently denies trademarks for common phrases under the “failure to function” doctrine.
  • A book title alone does not create trademark rights unless it’s part of a series.
  • Simply printing a phrase on merchandise does not automatically make it a trademark—it must function as a brand identifier.
  • Ethical considerations matter—trademarking a widely used phrase can create backlash if the public sees it as an attempt to control common language.

As the USPTO reviews Robbins’ application, it remains to be seen whether she can establish valid trademark rights. But the broader lesson is clear: trademark law is not a tool for claiming cultural expressions—it’s a system designed to protect brands.

For those looking to protect a brand name or slogan, it’s essential to work with an experienced trademark attorney to ensure your phrase qualifies for trademark protection.

Joey Vitale — Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

About the Author

Joey Vitale, Esq.

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law®

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they’ve filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer. Learn more →

Should I Trademark My Business Name? Team GPT vs OpenAI’s ChatGPT

Team GPT, an AI platform, just announced they’re changing their name, not because they wanted to, but because OpenAI sent legal letters asking them to stop using “GPT.” 

Despite having their own trademark filings, the company shared that they were advised to avoid “non-amicable, lengthy, and costly proceedings.” So, they’re rebranding.

This situation is a wake-up call for startups: trademark issues can come fast and unexpectedly, especially when your name overlaps with a well-known brand.

As a trademark law firm that works with entrepreneurs and startups, Indie Law sees this all the time. It’s a reminder that:

 

  • Just using a name or even filing for a trademark doesn’t guarantee you’re safe.
  • Trademark conflicts often come down to likelihood of confusion, not bad intent.
  • A name you love could still land you in legal hot water.

What This Means for Startup Founders and Online Brands

 Trademark issues don’t always arise because of intentional copying or brand theft. In many cases, they come down to one key legal concept: likelihood of confusion. If your brand name is similar to an existing mark, especially one held by a dominant company like OpenAI, you could be on the receiving end of a cease-and-desist, regardless of your intent or trademark filings.

 The cost of rebranding isn’t just financial. You risk losing customer trust, online visibility, and marketing momentum, all of which are hard-earned and difficult to rebuild.

 That’s why getting it right from the beginning is critical.

 Before you build a brand, protect it.


How do I trademark my business name?

You don’t have to figure this out alone.

As a trademark law firm serving clients nationwide, Indie Law helps business owners take proactive steps to protect their brand names.

At Indie Law, all consultations are virtual; no in-person meetings are required. Whether you’re launching your business or scaling fast, we can help you understand your options and avoid rebranding surprises.

👉 To get guidance from a trademark attorney, book a free virtual consultation

*Disclaimer: This article is meant to share general information, not legal advice. Reading it doesn’t create an attorney-client relationship. If you’d like tailored help protecting your brand, our Indie Law Team is here to guide you.

Joey Vitale — Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

About the Author

Joey Vitale, Esq.

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law®

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they’ve filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer. Learn more →

Trademark Design Dispute: Smucker vs Trader Joe’s

The J.M. Smucker Company (“Smucker”) has filed a federal lawsuit against Trader Joe’s Company (“Trader Joe’s”) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, alleging that the grocer’s newly released frozen “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” infringe its trademark rights relating to its well-known Uncrustables brand of crustless PB&J sandwiches.


Key Allegations

Smucker’s complaint highlights several similarities between the two products, including:

  • Round, crustless sandwich shape with crimped edges that closely resembles the Uncrustables product.
  • Packaging featuring blue accents and a sandwich with a bite taken out, which Smucker argues mimics its own trade dress and visual presentation.
  • Evidence of consumer confusion, citing social-media posts in which individuals allegedly believed Trader Joe’s product was made by or affiliated with Smucker.

Smucker notes it does not object to frozen crustless sandwiches in general,  only to products that it believes adopt protectable design elements associated with Uncrustables. The company is seeking destruction of Trader Joe’s current packaging and inventory, an injunction barring further sales, disgorgement of profits, and damages.


Trade Dress & Trademark Implications

Distinctiveness & Trade Dress

Smucker’s position is that the sandwich’s shape, crimped edging, and bite-mark imagery function as distinctive trade dress that consumers associate with Uncrustables. If proven, these features may receive trademark protection independent of the brand name.

Functionality vs. Protectability

Trader Joe’s may argue that the sandwich’s shape and crimping are functional,  necessary to seal the filling,  and therefore cannot be protected as trade dress. Functionality is a common defense in product-design trademark litigation.

Likelihood of Consumer Confusion

To prevail, Smucker must show that Trader Joe’s product is likely to cause consumer confusion regarding the source or affiliation of the sandwiches. Early social-media reactions are cited in the complaint as supporting evidence.

Brand Investment & Reputation

Smucker asserts that the Uncrustables brand represents more than $1 billion in investment over two decades and generates substantial annual revenue. That level of brand recognition may help support its claim that the product design has acquired distinctiveness.


Lessons for Business Owners

Proactive Monitoring & Enforcement

Brand owners should monitor the marketplace for look-alike products and take action when necessary. Delayed enforcement can weaken future protections.

Protecting Packaging & Product Design

Companies can pursue registration for product shapes, packaging designs, and other distinctive elements,  not only brand names. Documenting and securing these rights early can provide valuable protection as a business scales.

Understanding Functionality Limits

Only non-functional design elements can qualify for trade dress protection. When developing products, companies should identify which features are purely aesthetic and capable of acting as brand identifiers.

Evidence Matters

Real-world examples of consumer confusion,  even informal ones like social-media posts,  can strengthen an enforcement effort.

Private-Label & Competitor Risk

As private-label offerings continue to grow, brand owners should be mindful of imitation risk and build clear differentiation into packaging and product design.

Evaluate Litigation Strategy

Trademark disputes can be expensive and time-consuming. Businesses should weigh the costs and benefits of enforcement, settlement, and alternative resolutions.


Final Thoughts

This lawsuit underscores the importance of protecting brand identity, product presentation, and trade dress,  especially in markets where private-label competition is increasing. For companies developing consumer packaged goods, establishing and enforcing distinctive design elements can play a key role in long-term brand protection.

*Disclaimer: This article is meant to share general information, not legal advice. Reading it doesn’t create an attorney-client relationship. If you’d like tailored help protecting your brand, our Indie Law Team is here to guide you

Joey Vitale — Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law

About the Author

Joey Vitale, Esq.

CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law®

Joey Vitale is the CEO & Founding Trademark Attorney at Indie Law, a trademark law firm that helps you get peace of mind knowing you legally own your brand. He and his team are on a mission to be the best brand protectors they can be, and they’ve filed well over 2,500 trademarks. In addition to being an award-winning attorney, Joey is an internationally renowned speaker and the host of the chart-topping podcast, The Passive Income Lawyer. Learn more →

Our Latest Blog

Your brand is your most important asset. Dive into Indie Law’s resources to guide you through the maze of trademark law and keep your brand safe from copycats and infringers!

Follow Us

Trademark Blog Categories

Did you know?

Without Trademarks, You Have ZERO Rights To Your Brand.

We’re talking business names, logos, slogans… even podcast titles. Lots of entrepreneurs don’t protect their trademarks until it’s too late.

So we made a short, free video to help you avoid the biggest, most dangerous mistakes that business owners make.

Wanna see it?