Ongoing litigation between Breeze Smoke, LLC (Breeze Smoke) and Trucenta Holdings, LLC was updated on Tuesday when Trucenta moved for leave to file second amended counterclaims in the Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division.
The two companies have filed crossclaims against one another for trademark infringement and unfair competition over their respective uses of the word “breeze” in their cannabis products. Both companies have filed numerous trademark applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and claim to have started using the breeze mark in early 2019. For their claims each company is seeking injunctive relief and damages.
The newest development in the litigation was on behalf of Trucenta, who is seeking to amend their claims. Trucenta most recently filed a Second Amended Counterclaim in which they alleged that Breeze Smoke committed fraud when they sought to register marks for their electronic cigarettes with the USPTO and the TTAB.
Breeze Smoke had previously sought to enjoin Trucenta’s use of Breeze marks since Breeze Smoke had “valid trademark rights in its Breeze Marks” and Trucenta was using Breeze marks on products that were “unlawful under federal law and therefore could support any claim for trademark rights.”
Trucenta also countered that Breeze Smoke was in violation of certain laws since they represented that their vaping products were approved by the Federal Food and Drug Administration when they were not. Trucenta claimed that Breeze Smoke intentionally withheld these discrepancies with the FDA from the Court.
Trucenta’s trademark applications are presently being held up by Breeze Smoke’s applications, which are based on false representations that they have trademark rights. Currently, Trucenta is seeking an amendment to their allegations which would include a count of fraud based on “Breeze Smoke’s failure to disclose to the USPTO, including the TTAB that it has no lawful use in commerce of its electronic cigarettes.”