A food fight is underway as the J.M. Smucker Company, maker of the iconic Uncrustables, has filed a lawsuit against Trader Joe’s for trademark infringement. The suit was filed on October 13th, 2025 in Ohio federal court and alleges that Trader Joe’s “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” infringe on Uncrustables’ intellectual property (IP). What looks like a sticky situation for Trader Joe’s might not play out exactly as it seems.
(Image by Trader Joe’s)
Legal Lowdown
The lawsuit accuses Trader Joe’s of selling a product that is an “obvious attempt to trade off of the fame and recognition of the Uncrustables Design Marks.” The J.M. Smucker Company alleges the copycat product “deceived” consumers into thinking it is sponsored by or affiliated with the company. Smucker’s is requesting Trader Joe’s deliver infringing products for destruction and pay any “gains, profits, and advantages [the] Defendant has obtained.”
Uncrustables: A Deep Dive
The J.M. Smucker Company has been in business for over 127 years, selling a variety of products from jelly spreads to pet food. They began selling their iconic Uncrustables shortly after acquiring the brand in 2000, starting with two classic flavors: Peanut Butter & Grape Jelly and Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam. The ready-to-eat frozen sandwiches have since become a freezer staple for many families.
When we initially heard of the lawsuit, we were curious about what trademarks Trader Joe’s could have infringed on. To our surprise, Smucker’s has five registered trademarks on their Uncrustables packaging alone! After consulting with our managing attorney, Leela Madan, we outlined what we think could pass (or could possibly not pass) as trademark infringement between the two products.
1. The Name
We identified that the “Trader Joe’s Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” name is merely generic and is simply a string of descriptive terms. Meanwhile, “Uncrustables” is a unique and made-up word that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) identifies as “fanciful.” Fanciful trademarks are invented words and only have meaning in connection to their goods or services. In this case, it’s hard to say that Trader Joe’s is infringing on the Uncrustables name, as the name “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” merely describes the contents within the box.
2. The Shape
We really have to give kudos to the J.M. Smucker Company for going above and beyond with their IP protection. If you’ve ever had an Uncrustables sandwich, you’ve recognized its unique circular shape and neatly crimped edges. Well, Smucker’s actually owns a trademark registration for this design.
(Images by Trader Joe’s & J.M. Smucker)
3. The Color of the Box
The J.M. Smucker Company also noted that the Trader Joe’s box uses colors that resemble the blue tones used in the Uncrustables branding.
Looking at the packaging, it’s clear why Smucker’s might take issue. The Trader Joe’s packaging uses a similar cool-toned palette that could call the Uncrustables branding to mind. However, unless a company has established distinctiveness in a very specific shade and can prove consumers will associate that color exclusively with their product. The shared use of a blue hue may not be enough to seal the deal for Smucker’s.
4. The Bite
One of the more surprising claims involves the product photography. Smucker’s argues that the image of a sandwich on the Trader Joe’s box, with a single bite taken out, mimics a key element of the Uncrustables’ packaging. Smucker’s actually has trademark protection covering a bite-shaped design element.
However, food photography often uses the “bite reveal” to show texture and fillings, especially with sandwiches. For this claim to stick, Smucker’s would need to show that this specific bite placement or appearance has acquired distinctiveness in the minds of consumers.
Customer Expectations
It’s also worth considering how a typical shopper approaches these products. Uncrustables have been around for decades, and their circular, crimped edges are instantly recognizable. Trader Joe’s, on the other hand, is known for putting its own healthy or better-for-you spin on classic goods, and is something its customers expect.
Proactiveness Pays
Regardless of how this case plays out, there’s a valuable takeaway for any brand: trademark protection isn’t just about registering your name. Smucker’s is a great example of this. Its tight portfolio, covering everything from the product name to its packaging to the sandwich shape, shows a high level of foresight.
No matter the size of your business, this is a reminder that proactively protecting your intellectual property can prevent legal disputes and avoid legal fees. Whether or not Trader Joe’s ultimately crossed a legal line, Smucker’s preparation allows them to make their case from multiple angles.