Month: February 2024

As explained in the complaint: “Squishmallows have become a phenomenon, rapidly experiencing breakaway success and quickly turning into a coveted collectors’ item with an avid fanbase. Indeed, in 2023 Squishmallows was the top-selling toy in the country. Rather than competing fairly in the marketplace by creating its own unique concepts and product lines, Defendant Build-A-Bear, a company worth over 300 million dollars, decided that it would be easier to simply copy, imitate, and profit off the popularity and goodwill of Squishmallows, all in the hopes of confusing consumers into buying its products instead of Squishmallows.”

Lead Counsel Moez Kaba as quoted in Reuters:
“When it comes to intellectual property rights, imitation is not the sincerest form of flattery. Build-a-Bear cannot freeride on Kelly Toys’ extensive investments and creativity in the wildly successful Squishmallows products.”

Partner Sourabh Mishra as quoted in the Daily Journal:
“Squishmallows have skyrocketed to fame, appealing to consumers of all ages and backgrounds. Rather than create its own unique product, Build-A-Bear released copycat products that infringe the trade dress that consumers throughout the country associate with Squishmallows.”

Media Coverage
The New York Times
Associate Press
Reuters
BBC
Law360
The Recorder
Daily Journal
New York Post
The Guardian
The Telegraph
BusinessMatters

Allen sued McDonald’s in California state court in 2023, after McDonald’s announced its goal to increase spending with diverse-owned media companies, production houses, and content creators. Allen’s suit claimed that McDonald’s goal was an enforceable promise and that McDonald’s had engaged in fraud by failing to spend at least $50 million per year with his companies. The Court granted McDonald’s special anti-SLAPP motion to strike, dismissing Allen’s lawsuit in full after determining that McDonald’s conduct was protected and Allen failed to make a prima facie showing that he could prevail. McDonald’s is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs for defending against Allen’s lawsuit.

“This win represents full vindication for McDonald’s. By rejecting Allen’s effort to convert McDonald’s good faith DEI initiative into a personal money grab, and finding that his claim against McDonald’s lacked even “minimal merit,” the Court has brought a quick end to Allen’s baseless claims of racism,” said John Hueston, co-lead counsel for McDonald’s.

Moez Kaba, co-lead counsel added, “ESN has been on a campaign to sue McDonald’s to obtain, through the courts, what it cannot achieve in the market. The Court’s ruling is a powerful message: while it may be easy to file meritless but sensationalized lawsuits, there are hefty consequences for doing so.”

The dismissal is a major blow against Allen’s efforts to smear McDonald’s through baseless lawsuits. Hueston Hennigan also represents McDonald’s in a case brought by Allen under the federal civil rights laws, alleging that McDonald’s refused to advertise with his companies because of Allen’s race. Hueston Hennigan looks forward to proving these allegations to be similarly false.

The Hueston Hennigan team included John Hueston, Moez Kaba, Michael Todisco, Karen Ding, Justin Greer, Arianna Demas, and Segun Babatunde.

Media Coverage:
Law360
Daily Journal