Trader Joe’s Sues Trader Joe’s United for Trademark Use on Apparel

The Ninth Circuit revived Trader Joe’s Company’s trademark suit against the independent union Trader Joe’s United, reversing a January 2024 dismissal and remanding the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California for further proceedings. The published opinion, cited as Trader Joe’s Company v. Trader Joe’s United,, F.4th , , 2025 WL 2586674, issued September 8, 2025 and is the basis for consolidated appeals Nos. 24-720 and 24-2826 from district-court case No. 2:23-cv-05664-HDV-MAR.

Trader Joe’s has alleged in its July 13, 2023 complaint that it “has continuously used its distinctive TRADER JOE’S name and trademarks comprised of or incorporating TRADER JOE’S” in interstate commerce since 1967 and that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted registrations for the typed word mark TRADER JOE’S, the stylized word mark TRADER JOE’S, and the TRADER JOE’S (and design), frequently appearing in the company’s red typeface logo. The complaint alleges that Trader Joe’s United “affixe[d] its infringing product designs to reusable carrying bags,” and states that “Unauthorized use of Trader Joe’s valuable trademarks on merchandise sold to the general public is irreparably harming and, unless enjoined, will continue to irreparably harm, Trader Joe’s and its trademarks, business, reputation, and goodwill.”

Trader Joe’s sent a cease-and-desist letter to Trader Joe’s United on June 27, 2023 and reiterated the demand on July 5, 2023 after the union declined to stop sales and asserted that the company’s Lanham Act threat constituted retaliation against unionization efforts. At district court Judge Hernán D. Vera granted the union’s motion to dismiss in January 2024, writing that he “failed to see ‘compelling similarities in any of the designs’” and that “Courts have often found that a labor union’s use of an employer’s trademark as part of communications about the employer’s labor practices is unlikely to cause confusion in context.”

The Ninth Circuit record shows active appellate litigation: counsel changes and notices of appearance filed February 13, 2024 adding Jennifer L. Barry and terminating David R. Eberhart for Trader Joe’s Company, plus notices by Jessica Stebbins Bina and Laura Washington; later notices of appearance by Sonya Z. Mehta on July 29, 2024 and Retu Singla on August 13, 2024. Trader Joe’s submitted opening briefs and excerpts of record (DE 17, DE 18) with paper copies received July 30, 2024, and Trader Joe’s United filed an answering brief (DE 26) with paper copies received August 29, 2024. The Ninth Circuit heard argument March 7, 2025 in Pasadena, California, before Judges Gabriel P. Sanchez and Holly A. Thomas and District Judge James Donato sitting by designation, with an opinion by Judge Sanchez.

On the merits the Ninth Circuit reversed dismissal of the trademark infringement claim, finding that a reasonably prudent consumer could be confused about the origin of the goods and that several likelihood-of-confusion factors were neutral at the pleading stage. The court emphasized online diversion risks tied to initial-interest confusion given that Trader Joe’s promotes products online but sells them only in stores while Trader Joe’s United markets and sells merchandise on its website. The court stated in its opinion that “Finally, the district court prematurely concluded that TRADER JOE’S COMPANY V. TRADER JOES UNITED 5 the NLGA barred it from granting injunctive relief in this matter without further development of the record or the parties’ positions. We remand for further proceedings.”

LaborRelationsUpdate reported that the Ninth Circuit also vacated an award of approximately $112,600 in legal fees that had been awarded to Trader Joe’s United at the district-court level. LaborRelationsUpdate and MSK Blog commentary note that the decision highlights the intersection of trademark law and labor law as unions sell merchandise during organizing drives, and that the court found some similarities such as red and circle logo shapes but also observed distinguishing features like Trader Joe’s United’s raised fist symbol.

CourtListener’s docket shows continued activity; a user-supplied report states the last known filing was timestamped February 10, 2026. The Ninth Circuit’s reversal and remand leave the Central District of California to further develop the record on consumer confusion and whether injunctive relief is barred under the Norris-LaGuardia Act.