Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc.

Lucky Brand and Marcel were in a long-running trademark fight over the word "Lucky" on clothing. The Supreme Court said Marcel could not block Lucky Brand from raising new defenses in a later lawsuit because that later case involved different conduct and different claims.

The decision means a company in a repeat lawsuit is not automatically stuck with every defense choice it made in an earlier case. For example, brands fighting over a trademark can still raise new defenses if the later suit is about different acts or claims.

The Supreme Court has finished its work on this case. The parties and lower courts must apply the Court's view that Lucky Brand was allowed to raise new defenses in the later suit.

The companies disputed use of the word "Lucky" on clothing. The legal fight was over whether Marcel could stop Lucky Brand from using defenses not resolved in earlier litigation.

It gives businesses more room to defend themselves in later cases that involve new claims. That can matter in repeat trademark battles over new ads, products, or sales.

The Supreme Court's review is over. Any remaining proceedings must follow the Court's conclusion that Lucky Brand could raise new defenses in the later case.