United States: First Circuit Rejects Seventh Circuit's Approach To Rejection Of Trademark Licenses: Licensees Retain No Post-Rejection Trademark Rights

In one of the first decisions issued this year by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the court addressed an issue of first impression. In Mission Products Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, n/k/a Old Cold LLC, No. 16-9016 (1st Cir. Jan. 12, 2018), the First Circuit held that the omission of trademarks from the definition of "intellectual property" in Section 101(35A) of the Bankruptcy Code, as incorporated by Section 365(n), leaves a trademark licensee with nothing more than a claim for damages upon the rejection of its license under Section 365(a). In so holding, the First Circuit joined the majority of bankruptcy courts that have addressed the issue and rejected the view adopted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Background on Section 365 and Trademarks

Subject to court approval, Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code permits a debtor-in-possession to reject an executory contract. However, Section 365(n) affords special protection to licensees of "intellectual property," as that term is defined by Section 101(35A), in the event of rejection, provided they meet certain requirements and conditions set forth therein.

Section 365(n) was enacted in response to the Fourth Circuit's 1985 decision in Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir. 1985), which held that that rejection of an intellectual property license under Section 365(a) terminated all of the licensee's rights under the license agreement and provided only for a money damages claim. In conjunction with enacting Section 365(n), Congress also amended the definition of intellectual property set forth in Section 101(35A) to include: trade secrets, patents and patent applications, plant varieties, copyrights and mask work protected under chapter 9 of title 17. It does not include trademarks. The legislative history indicates that trademarks were intentionally omitted, and congressional action "postponed," in order to allow for further study that was deemed necessary.

A majority of bankruptcy courts have inferred that the omission of trademarks from the definition of intellectual property in Section 101(35A) suggests that Congress intended not to extend the protections afforded by Section 365(n) to trademarks, thereby codifying Lubrizol with respect to trademarks. 

In Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. Chicago American Manufacturing, LLC, 686 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2012), the Seventh Circuit, however, took a different approach from the majority. In Sunbeam, the court reasoned that the omission of trademarks from the definition set forth Section 101(35A) "means that Section 365(n) does not affect trademarks one way or the other" and, rather than vaporizing a licensee's rights upon rejection, it is more appropriate to apply Section 365(g), which classifies rejection as a breach, excusing the estate's continued performance but leaving the licensee's trademark rights in place.

History of In re Tempnology Case

Tempnology was an athletic textiles company that developed a chemical-free cooling fabric used to produce "Coolcore" performance apparel and accessories. In 2012, Tempnology entered into a marketing and distribution agreement with the appellant, Mission Product Holdings, Inc., which granted Mission exclusive distribution rights with respect to certain of Tempnology's products, a non-exclusive license to Tempnology's intellectual property (expressly excluding trademarks), and a non-exclusive license to use the Coolcore trademark and logo for the limited purpose of performing Mission's obligations under the agreement.

Immediately after commencing its chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2015, the debtor filed a motion seeking to reject certain executory contracts under Section 365(a), including the agreement with Mission. Mission objected and expressly reserved its rights under Section 365(n), which lead to a fight over the scope of Mission's rights protected by Section 365(n). The debtor argued that Mission's election under Section 365(n) was limited to its non-exclusive intellectual property license (which it conceded was protected), whereas Mission asserted that its distribution and trademark rights were also protected.

The Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Hampshire held that neither Mission's exclusive distribution rights, nor its rights to use the debtor's trademark and logo, fell within the scope of rights Mission could elect to retain under Section 365(n). The bankruptcy court reasoned that the exclusive distribution rights amounted to nothing more than the right to sell and distribute certain of the debtor's products, which did not rise to the level of a license in intellectual property that could survive rejection. With respect to Mission's trademark rights, the bankruptcy court followed the majority of courts that have held by negative inference that the omission of "trademarks" from the definition of "intellectual property" set forth in Section 101(35A) renders trademark rights outside the protections afforded by Section 365(n), and, therefore, held that Mission did not retain its trademark rights post-rejection.

On appeal, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the "BAP") affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling with respect to the exclusive distribution rights, but rejected its analysis and application of Lubrizol to Mission's trademark rights the BAP elected instead to follow the Seventh Circuit's approach in Sunbeam, finding that the bankruptcy court had erred in ruling that Mission's trademark rights had terminated upon rejection. The BAP determined that Mission's post-rejection rights were governed by the terms of the agreement and applicable non-bankruptcy law. [Read our Alert, " First Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Latest to Warm Up to Protections for Trademark Licensees in Bankruptcy."]

First Circuit Rejection of Sunbeam

The First Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling with respect to Mission's exclusive distribution rights, agreeing that "[a]n exclusive right to sell a product is not equivalent to an exclusive right to exploit the product's underlying intellectual property."

However, the First Circuit rejected the approach taken by both the BAP and the Seventh Circuit in Sunbeam, instead favoring a "categorical approach of leaving trademark licenses unprotected from court-approved rejection, unless and until Congress should decide otherwise." Accordingly, the First Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling that all of Mission's rights to the debtor's trademarks were terminated upon rejection.

In its analysis of Section 365(n)'s application to trademarks, the First Circuit examined the legislative history and concluded that, in omitting trademarks from Section 101(35A), Congress did not intend for bankruptcy courts to take an equitable approach in determining the effect of rejection on a trademark license. The court identified seven sections of the Bankruptcy Code where Congress had expressly "grant[ed] bankruptcy courts the ability to 'equitably' craft exceptions to the Code's rules," and noted that such an express grant of authority was absent from Section 365(n).

The First Circuit also criticized the Seventh Circuit's approach in Sunbeam as founded on an erroneous premise that a debtor-licensor could be freed from continuing performance obligations under a trademark license, while at the same time allowing a licensee to retain its right to use the trademark. The court reasoned that a trademark licensor is required to continuously "monitor and exercise control over the quality of the goods sold to the public under cover of the trademark" to prevent public deception and protect against competition. Noting that a licensor's failure to do so could jeopardize both the trademark's validity and value, the First Circuit reasoned that the Sunbeam approach would force a debtor to either accept such risks or continue to perform executory obligations that it had rejected, which runs counter to the policy underlying Section 365(a). The court determined that in most instances the "residual enforcement burden" on the debtor would be greater than the burden on a licensee of having its trademark rights converted to a prepetition damages claim.

The First Circuit concluded that the best approach was a categorical one and that the protections of Section 365(n) should not be extended to trademark licenses "unless and until Congress should decide otherwise."

The First Circuit's Tempnology decision omits any reference to the Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey's decision in In re Crumbs Bake Shop, Inc., in which that court held that "Congress intended the bankruptcy courts to exercise their equitable powers to decide, on a case by case basis, whether trademark licensees may retain the rights listed under Section 365(n)."  522 B.R. 766, 772 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2014). [Read our Alert, " New Jersey Bankruptcy Court Upholds Trademark Licensees' Rights to Use Trademark Despite Licensor's Bankruptcy."] However, the First Circuit seemed to expressly reject that approach in its rejection of the dissent's equitable approach.

The Dissent

Judge Juan R. Torruella dissented in part, disagreeing with the majority's bright-line rule that rejection of a trademark license under Section 365(a) eliminates the licensee's right to use the trademark post-rejection in contravention of congressional intent. The dissent acknowledged the majority's concerns with respect to the potential "residual enforcement burden" on a debtor-trademark owner to "monitor and exercise control over the quality of the goods sold to the public" post-rejection, but noted that licensees also have quality control obligations that may be enforced. The dissent suggested that Mission's post-rejection rights should be governed by the terms of the agreement and applicable non-bankruptcy law "to determine the appropriate equitable remedy of the functional breach of contract."

No notice of appeal or petition for rehearing had been filed as of the date of this Alert.

For Further Information

If you have any questions about this Alert, please contact Paul D. Moore, Keri L. Wintle, any of the attorneys in the Business Reorganization and Financial Restructuring Practice Group, any of the attorneys in the Trademark, Copyright, Entertainment and Advertising Practice Group or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Stites & Harbison PLLC
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Stites & Harbison PLLC
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions