BBK TOBACCO & FOODS LLP V. CENTRAL COAST AGRICULTURE, INC., No. 22-16190 (9th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was asked to rule on a trademark infringement case brought by BBK Tobacco & Foods LLP against Central Coast Agriculture, Inc. BBK, a distributor and seller of smoking-related products with trademarked "RAW" branding, alleged that CCA infringed on its mark by selling cannabis products under the mark "Raw Garden." The district court granted summary judgment in favor of CCA on BBK’s trademark claims, but in favor of BBK on its counterclaims to invalidate several of CCA’s trademark applications and CCA’s counterclaim to cancel BBK’s trademark applications for unlawful use.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of BBK on its claim to invalidate four of CCA’s trademark applications. The court held that, under 15 U.S.C. § 1119, when an action involves a claim of infringement on a registered trademark, a district court also has jurisdiction to consider challenges to the trademark applications of a party to the action. The court also held that lack of a bona fide intent to use a mark in commerce is a valid basis to challenge a trademark application.
However, in a separately filed memorandum disposition, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment on BBK’s trademark claims and affirmed the summary judgment on CCA’s counterclaim to cancel BBK’s trademark for unlawful use.
Court Description: Trademark. The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s judgment and remanded in a trademark infringement action brought by BBK Tobacco & Foods LLP against Central Coast Agriculture, Inc.
BBK, a distributor and seller of smoking-related products with trademarked “RAW” branding, alleged that CCA infringed its mark by selling cannabis products with the mark “Raw Garden.” The district court dismissed BBK’s false advertising claim and granted summary judgment in favor of CCA on BBK’s trademark claims. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of BBK on its counterclaim to invalidate several of CCA’s trademark applications and on CCA’s counterclaim to cancel BBK’s trademark applications for unlawful use.
The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of BBK on its claim to invalidate four of CCA’s trademark applications. The panel held that, under 15 U.S.C. § 1119, when an action involves a claim of infringement on a registered trademark, a district court also has jurisdiction to consider challenges to the trademark applications of a party to the action. Agreeing with other circuits and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the panel also held that lack of a bona fide intent to use a mark in commerce is a valid basis to challenge a trademark application.
Dissenting, Judge Bumatay wrote that federal courts lack authority to cancel pending applications for trademark registration before the Patent and Trademark Office has even registered the trademark.
In a separately filed memorandum disposition, the panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment on BBK’s trademark claims and affirmed the summary judgment on CCA’s counterclaim to cancel BBK’s trademark for unlawful use.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.