a handful of presentations, seminars and lectures. This sort of minimal activity is insufficient to satisfy the “use” element of the test. See Momentum Luggage & Leisure Bags v. Jansport, Inc., No. 00 Civ. 7909(DLC), 2001 WL 830667, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 2001), aff'd, 45 Fed.Appx. 42 (2d Cir.2002). In Momentum, the court examined the plaintiffs advertising, promotion, and sales and found that the plaintiff in that case never made deliberate and continuous use of its mark despite the plaintiff having exhibited products at an industry trade show, advertised in a magazine, generated approximately $3,000 in sales over two years, and having been mentioned in two trade show journals. Id. at *6; see, e.g., Natural Footwear Ltd. v. Hart, Schaffner & Marx, 760 F.2d 1383, 1400 (3d Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>) (cited in Momentum, 2001 WL 830667, at *7);
holding we reject the appellants contention that a majority may be less than 50 of the citizen votingage population holding that demands for benefits not less than 10 million dollars contributions greater than 50 million dollars and less than 100 million dollars and attorneys fees not less than 150000000 were ambiguous and did not satisfy the sum certain requirement holding that when no statutory exception applies  the district court lacks the authority to impose a sentence less than the statutory mandatory minimum holding that a district court commits reversible error when it sentences a defendant to less than the statutory minimum where no exception to the mandatory minimum applies holding that gross sales of less than 5000 to fewer than 50 customers were below the minimum threshold for market penetration