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

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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has unanimously upheld a trade mark owner’s right to have counterclaims for trade mark cancellation dismissed if it has withdrawn infringement claims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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Daniel Raymond, who will serve as head of client relations, tells Managing IP that law firms must offer ‘brave’ opinions if they want to keep winning new business
The new outfit, Ashurst Perkins Coie, will bring together around 3,000 lawyers across 23 countries
In the seventh episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Out, a network for LGBTQAI+ professionals and their allies
Sara Horton, co-chair of Willkie’s IP litigation group, reflects on launching the firm’s Chicago office during a global pandemic, and how she advises young, female attorneys
Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Gift this article