Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1043_7648.pdf
Page Number: 18.0

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

15 

Opinion of the Court 

serves to “identify and distinguish [the mark user’s] goods 
. . .  and  to indicate  the  source  of  the  goods.”   §1127.6    Be-
cause  the  proceedings  below  were  not  in  accord  with  this
understanding  of  extraterritoriality,  we  vacate  the  judg-
ment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for fur-
ther proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

It is so ordered. 

—————— 

6 JUSTICE JACKSON has proposed a further elaboration of “use in com-
merce,” see post, at 1–4 (concurring opinion), but we have no occasion to 
address the precise contours of that phrase here.