Grubhub Inc., the popular food delivery platform, now faces a significant legal challenge in Illinois federal court. The company stands accused of using restaurant trademarks without permission and listing these establishments on its app without their consent. This lawsuit, involving multiple plaintiffs, raises important issues of trademark infringement and false association. Below is an overview of the latest developments and key issues in this high-stakes legal battle.
(Image from: USA Herald)
U.S. District Judge LaShonda A. Hunt recently allowed trademark infringement and false association claims to proceed for two plaintiffs—MF Tasty LLC and Iowa City Coffee Co.—both of whom own registered trademarks. This ruling is pivotal, affirming that their claims are strong enough to continue.
However, Judge Hunt dismissed false association claims from seven other plaintiffs—Lynn Scott LLC, The Farmer’s Wife LLC, Thuan Luu, Old Crown Inc., 132 Degrees LLC, MDR LLC, and Momobbq Co. LLC—because they lack registered trademarks. Still, these plaintiffs have the opportunity to amend their claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act if they can demonstrate a plausible trademark interest.
At the heart of the lawsuit is whether Grubhub misled consumers about its relationship with listed restaurants, including potential discrepancies in menu offerings and pricing. Grubhub argues that the claims should be dismissed for eight of the nine plaintiffs, pointing to issues with trademark registration and business names. The plaintiffs, however, assert that proving trademark protection is not necessary at this stage.
(Image from: Bloomberg Law)
This legal dispute has been ongoing since 2020, with Grubhub accused of misappropriating restaurant trademarks and creating confusion among consumers. Initially, the case was paused while a similar case in Colorado was nearing settlement. However, as that settlement deal stalled, the Illinois federal court lifted the stay, allowing the litigation to resume.
As the case progresses, its outcome could have significant implications. Specifically, it may set important precedents for how food delivery platforms and restaurants address trademark issues and navigate consumer representation. Ultimately, the ruling could shape future disputes of a similar nature.
Do you have questions about intellectual property or need assistance? Feel free to contact us at (713) 364-4796 or admin@madan-law.com.