Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US Supreme Court backs Nike in Air Force 1 trade mark case

The US Supreme Court has unanimously upheld a trade mark owner’s right to have counterclaims for trade mark cancellation dismissed if it has withdrawn infringement claims

The dispute arose after Nike sued rival Already (also known as Yums) in New York for infringement of its US trade mark 3,451,905, which covers the shape of its Air Force 1 shoe. Already counter-sued, seeking cancellation of the mark on the grounds that it was invalid, as well as a declaration that its own shoes did not infringe.

Soon after Nike withdrew the suit, and gave a broad covenant not to sue covering Already’s existing footwear product designs “and any colorable imitations thereof”.

But Already persisted with its counterclaims. Nike therefore asked the court to dismiss them.

The district court agreed with Nike, saying there was no longer any “case or controversy” between the parties. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit agreed.

Ruling on January 9, the Supreme Court also agreed, saying that the broad covenant not to sue made it absolutely clear the case is moot and that Nike had met the stringent requirements of the voluntary cessation doctrine.

But in a concurring opinion, four judges warned that covenants such as that given by Nike “ought not to be taken as an automatic means for the party who first charged a competitor with trademark infringement suddenly to abandon the suit without incurring the risk of an ensuing adverse adjudication”.

Already can still seek cancellation of the trade mark at the USPTO if it wishes.

INTA submitted an amicus brief in the case and reported on the decision.

More coverage of the case is available on the SCOTUS blog and the TTAB blog among other sources.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Sukanya Sarkar shares her thoughts on this year’s annual meeting in Singapore, where debates ranged from AI opportunities to improving law firm culture
The court’s ruling is a good reminder that US parties aren’t guaranteed attorney fees just because they win, say sources
With business confidence in a shaky state, Rachel Tong and Lisa Yong of Rouse discuss how in-house IP teams can manage their trademark portfolios through uncertain times
The Court of Appeal had stern words for Med-El’s representatives after they highlighted a deputy judge’s background as a solicitor
Funders and NPEs say asserting patent portfolios can minimise risk at the USPTO’s PTAB, where procedure remains a controversial topic
The US Supreme Court’s ruling wasn’t a surprise and reflects a trend that had already been bubbling away for a while, say tech and pharma counsel
Previous attempts at major transatlantic tie-ups have failed, so lawyers will keep their eyes firmly on Allen & Overy’s grand plans
INTA CEO Etienne Sanz de Acedo shares his plans if he were to win the EUIPO leadership race and says his application does not affect his INTA role
The French finance minister told António Campinos the timing of an EPO event in Lisbon could be seen as interference in the EUIPO leadership race