July 17, 2019

July 16, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 15, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Jury Awards $95.5M in Trademark Infringement Case

$95.5M in damages has been awarded by a jury in the ongoing trademark infringement battle between Walmart Stores, Inc. (Walmart) and Variety Stores, Inc. (Variety) over the use of the trademark “BACKYARD.” A federal judge approved a jury verdict that determined Walmart must pay Variety for infringing on Variety’s trademarks “The Backyard,” “Backyard,” and “Backyard BBQ.” This decision comes after Variety appealed a lower court’s decision to award Variety a $31.5M summary judgment. Walmart issued a statement calling the $95M verdict excessive and indicated that it is evaluating its options, including post-trial motions and an appeal. We have provided more details below, but stay tuned, as we suspect we have not heard the last of this dispute.

Background of the Case

In April 2014, Variety filed a civil action in federal district court (for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and deceptive practices) against Walmart for its adoption and use of the trademark “Backyard Grill” in connection with grills and grilling supplies. Variety owns a federal trademark registration for the mark “The Backyard” for “lawn and garden supplies and equipment” and has common law rights in the marks “Backyard” and “Backyard BBQ” in connection with “lawn and garden equipment, grills, and grilling products.”

In December 2015, a District Court granted partial summary judgement in Variety’s favor, concluding that Variety’s trademarks were strong, its rights went beyond just the sale of lawn and garden products protected by its federal registration, and that Walmart’s use of the mark “Backyard Grill” created a likelihood of confusion. Of particular note in the District Court’s decision is the commentary that (i) Walmart ignored its own counsel’s advice and proceeded with adoption of “Backyard Grill” despite Variety’s use, and that such behavior exhibited an intent by Walmart to confuse consumers; and (ii) this case was about a large corporation trying to outlast a smaller company in competition or litigation.

The District Court ordered Walmart to pay Variety $32.5 million in profits, which was based on a calculation of sales from the jurisdictions in which the parties directly competed minus Walmart’s costs of the goods and overhead. Variety moved for a separate jury trial to determine additional non-disgorgement damages. The District Court denied the request and Variety appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated the District Court’s original $32.5 million summary judgment, deciding that a jury, not a judge, should have decided several disputed infringement factors.

On February 12, 2019, a jury determined that Variety proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Walmart’s use of the mark “Backyard Grill” was likely to cause consumer confusion and therefore was infringing, and also found Walmart’s use was willful. Walmart was ordered to pay Variety a total of $95.5M for its infringement of the trademark “BACKYARD.” The award was calculated as $45M for Walmart’s trademark infringement and $50M for sales of the infringed goods.

For more on this case, see Variety Stores, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., E.D.N.C. No. 5:14-CV-217.

Copyright © 2019 Robinson & Cole LLP. All rights reserved.

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Julianna M. Charpentier Real estate attorney Robinson Cole
Associate

Julie Charpentier focuses her practice on business and real estate litigation. She is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation Group and its Real Estate and Title Insurance Team.  

Business Litigation

Julie assists clients in handling complex business disputes, including claims for breach of contract and business torts such as fraud, misrepresentation, and unfair and deceptive trade practices. In addition to helping clients in traditional litigation, she also assists with alternative dispute resolution, such as arbitration.  

Real Estate...

617.557.5930
Alaine C. Doolan IP lawyer Hartford Robinson Cole
Counsel

Alaine Doolan focuses her practice primarily in the areas of intellectual property, brand management, corporate transactions, technology, and Internet-related law. She works with clients from a broad range of industries, such as food and beverage, fashion and merchandising, software solutions, and health care. She is a member of the firm's Business Transactions and Intellectual Property + Technology Law Groups. 

Intellectual Property and Technology

Alaine works to protect corporate brands through the prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of trademarks, copyrights and domain names domestically and worldwide. She works with clients to develop strategies for launching and protecting new brands. She also advises clients on a variety of intellectual property infringement matters, and she handles opposition, cancellation, and appeal proceedings before the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Alaine also secures and protects clients' intellectual property through the preparation of various documents, including assignments, security interests, and nondisclosure and coexistence agreements. She has worked for two large consumer products companies and managed 4,000-plus worldwide trademark portfolios for both.

860.275.8378
William Egan Commercial Litigator
Partner

William Egan has over twenty-five years of commercial litigation and business law experience. He handles trials at the state and federal level, along with arbitrations and mediations, involving both domestic and international matters.

In addition to his litigation practice, Bill counsels businesses on the negotiation and drafting of contracts and business agreements.

He also counsels clients on issues related to franchises and distributorships, technology, and commercial business matters, as well as real estate and leasing-related matters. Bill is a lecturer on the topics of...

860-275-8365