Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

United States Supreme Court Holds Broad Covenant Not to Sue Moots Trademark Infringement Action
Posted in Trademarks

The Supreme Court’s decision in Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. ___, 184 L. Ed. 2d 553 (U.S. Jan. 9, 2013), is important for franchisors who may be considering bringing a trademark infringement action against a competitor (including a former franchisee) using a similar mark, as well as for recipients of such infringement claims. The unanimous court affirmed the lower courts’ rulings that, once a trademark plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed its infringement suit and issued a covenant not to sue, the district court loses federal jurisdiction under Article III of the U.S. Constitution and is barred from considering a defendant’s counterclaim that the mark is invalid.

Nike had filed an infringement action against a competitor shoe manufacturer, Already, LLC. Already counterclaimed, alleging that Nike’s trademark was invalid and seeking to cancel the registration. Four months later, Nike delivered a comprehensive covenant not to sue to Already, in which Nike promised not to assert any claim against Already relating to the mark based on any of Already’s current or previous shoe designs. Nike then moved to dismiss all claims and counterclaims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court dismissed the case as moot, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. In reviewing the case, the Supreme Court noted that the breadth of the covenant was adequate to meet the “formidable burden” of showing that Nike could not reasonably be expected to resume its enforcement efforts against Already. The high court rejected Already’s policy argument that the case allowed Nike to bully a small innovator, noting that issuing covenants not to sue could be a risky long-term strategy for a trademark holder.

The Supreme Court’s ruling confirms that franchisors and other trademark owners enjoy flexibility when issuing trademark cease and desist letters and in filing infringement suits. If the franchisor has a change of heart a properly drafted covenant not to sue can put an end to all aspects of the claim as well as potentially harmful counterclaims.

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

The information contained in this post is provided to alert you to legal developments and should not be considered legal advice. It is not intended to and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Specific questions about how this information affects your particular situation should be addressed to one of the individuals listed. No representations or warranties are made with respect to this information, including, without limitation, as to its completeness, timeliness, or accuracy, and Lathrop GPM shall not be liable for any decision made in connection with the information. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.

About this Publication

The Franchise Memorandum is a collection of postings on summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors brought to you by Lathrop GPM LLP. 

To subscribe to monthly emails for The Franchise Memorandum, please click here

Topics

Archives

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Blog Authors