By Twin Cities Trademarks | Patent & Trademark Law | Minneapolis, St. Paul, Twin Cities, Minnesota

Updated September 2026

_____________________________

Direct Answer: Filing a Section 1(b) Intent-to-Use application gives brand owners a valuable opportunity to reserve trademark rights before a product or service has fully launched. But the description of goods and services has to do more than sound impressive. It must be broad enough to protect the brand’s anticipated commercial ecosystem, while still being specific enough to satisfy USPTO requirements and accurately reflect a real plan to use the mark in commerce.

1. Core Principles for Drafting ITU Descriptions

A. Establish Definiteness and Avoid Vague Language

One of the most common mistakes in an ITU application is using language that sounds broad but is legally indefinite. The USPTO generally requires applicants to identify goods and services with enough specificity that the scope of the application is clear. Open-ended phrases such as “including,” “such as,” “etc.,” or “and other related products” can create uncertainty because they suggest the list is not complete. That uncertainty may lead to an Office Action requiring the applicant to clarify or narrow the wording.

For example, “Clothing, including shirts, pants, and other apparel” is less effective because it leaves the full scope of “other apparel” unclear. A stronger version would be “Clothing, namely, shirts, pants, and jackets.” The same principle applies to software. “Software solutions for business efficiency” is too general, while “Downloadable computer software for database management” gives the examining attorney a clearer function and classification basis.

B. Leverage the USPTO ID Manual for Broad Standard Terms

The USPTO’s Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual, often called the ID Manual, is one of the most useful tools for drafting descriptions that are both broad and acceptable. Rather than inventing custom wording, applicants should look for the broadest pre-approved terms that accurately match their intended goods or services. This approach helps reduce the risk of indefiniteness refusals and may help avoid additional fees tied to custom identifications.

Using ID Manual wording can also make the filing more efficient. For instance, instead of describing “marketing consultation for real estate agents in Minnesota,” an applicant may be able to use the broader standard term “Marketing services,” if that accurately reflects the intended offering. Likewise, instead of narrowing apparel to “hand-knit wool winter socks,” the broader term “Socks” may provide cleaner and more flexible coverage when it matches the applicant’s bona fide intent.

2. Strategic Drafting Techniques for Broad Coverage

Strategy 1: Use Category Anchors with “Namely”

A practical way to balance breadth and specificity is to begin with a recognized category and then define that category with the word “namely.” This structure allows the description to reach beyond a single product while still giving the USPTO a closed, definite list of representative goods or functions.

In the software context, a compliant description might read: “Downloadable software for financial management, namely, software for tracking expenses, processing payments, generating invoices, and managing payroll.” This wording identifies the general field, financial management, while also specifying the particular functions the software is intended to perform.

Strategy 2: Claim Modular Ecosystem Classes

Many modern brands do not operate in only one commercial lane. A clothing brand, for example, may sell physical apparel, operate an online store, release a mobile app, and eventually offer web-based customization tools. When the business plan supports these offerings, the descriptions should be drafted across the appropriate international classes in a coordinated way so the application reflects the broader brand ecosystem.

Offering Type	International Class	Broad Compliant Drafting Example
Physical Goods	Class 25 (Apparel)	“Apparel, namely, shirts, hats, hoodies, and jackets.”
E-Commerce/Retail	Class 35 (Business)	“On-line retail store services featuring apparel and headwear.”
Digital/Software	Class 9 (Technology)	“Downloadable mobile applications for ordering custom apparel.”
SaaS/Services	Class 42 (Technology)	“Providing temporary use of non-downloadable web-based software for apparel design.”

3. Avoiding the ITU Trap: The Bona Fide Intent Requirement

Broad drafting is useful only when it is grounded in a genuine business plan. A Section 1(b) application is based on a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, not on a speculative wish list. If the identification includes goods or services the applicant never seriously intended to offer, the application may become vulnerable during opposition, cancellation, or later examination events.

This issue becomes especially important when the applicant reaches the Statement of Use stage. At that point, the applicant must show actual use of the mark for the listed goods or services and submit an acceptable specimen. If the original ITU application listed 20 items but only five have actually launched by the deadline, the unlaunched items should be deleted before registration. In other words, breadth at filing should be strategic, not careless.

4. Pre-Filing Description Review

Before submitting a Section 1(b) application, applicants should review the description with both legal compliance and business reality in mind. Start by checking whether the wording comes directly from, or closely tracks, the USPTO ID Manual. Then remove relative or open-ended phrases that create ambiguity, especially terms like “etc.,” “including,” or “associated goods.”

For software-related filings, the description should also identify whether the product is downloadable software, typically associated with Class 9, or non-downloadable web-based software or SaaS, typically associated with Class 42. Finally, the applicant should confirm that its internal plans, product roadmap, vendor relationships, or development activity support a real intention to offer every listed item within the relevant ITU timeline.

Conclusion

A strong ITU description is not simply the longest list of goods and services an applicant can imagine. It is a carefully drafted bridge between the brand’s future commercial plans and the USPTO’s requirement for definite, accurate identifications. By using accepted terminology, anchoring broad categories with specific wording, and staying disciplined about bona fide intent, applicants can build a filing strategy that is both protective and compliant.

_________________________________

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this content does not create an attorney-client relationship. IP law is highly fact-specific — contact a licensed patent attorney to discuss your particular situation. Twin Cities Trademarks is a registered trademark law firm.

Twin Cities Trademarks | Trademark Law & Product Branding Law | Minneapolis and  St. Paul, Minnesota           

Twin Cities Trademarks is a Minnesota Trademark law firm and Minnesota Product Branding law firm providing trademark legal services to inventors, entrepreneurs, startups, and businesses throughout the Twin Cities and Minnesota.