Vegadelphia v. Beyond Meat: $39M Trademark Verdict

Case Background

In a high-stakes intellectual property dispute within the plant-based food industry, Sonate Corporation, doing business as Vegadelphia Foods, initiated legal action against Beyond Meat, Inc. and Dunkin’ Brands. Vegadelphia, a Pennsylvania-based company founded in 2004 by two brothers with a multigenerational history in the food industry, had established a reputation for manufacturing high-quality vegetarian products. By 2013, the company had adopted the marketing slogan "WHERE GREAT TASTE IS PLANT-BASED" to promote its items, including veggie-lean beef and chicken alternatives. Vegadelphia successfully registered this mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on March 10, 2015, and the mark had subsequently achieved incontestable status, strengthening its legal protection.

The conflict emerged after Dunkin’ Brands and Beyond Meat launched a collaborative partnership in 2019 to sell the "Beyond Sausage Sandwich" at Dunkin’ locations nationwide. To support this product launch, the companies rolled out an extensive advertising campaign centered on the slogan "GREAT TASTE PLANT-BASED". This marketing push utilized television commercials, social media endorsements, and in-store signage, featuring celebrity promotions that generated over one billion viewer impressions.

Cause

Vegadelphia filed suit alleging that Beyond Meat and Dunkin’ Brands had infringed upon its federally registered trademark by adopting a confusingly similar slogan. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants had created their slogan by simply removing the words "WHERE" and "IS" from Vegadelphia’s registered mark or by reversing the word order to "PLANT-BASED GREAT TASTE". Vegadelphia claimed the Defendants had launched this campaign with actual or constructive knowledge of the Plaintiff's pre-existing rights, noting that Beyond Meat had previously attempted to register the "PLANT-BASED GREAT TASTE" mark but had been rejected by the USPTO due to a likelihood of confusion with Vegadelphia’s mark.

Injury

The complaint detailed how the Defendants' massive marketing power had caused "reverse confusion" in the marketplace. Vegadelphia argued that because Dunkin’ and Beyond Meat had flooded the market with their similar slogan, consumers would mistakenly believe that Vegadelphia was the infringer or that its products were affiliated with the larger corporations. The Plaintiff contended that this saturation overwhelmed their market presence, diminished their valuable goodwill, and hindered their ability to license their mark or expand their business.

Damages Sought

Vegadelphia sought a permanent injunction to prevent the Defendants from using the infringing slogans in any future marketing. Financially, the Plaintiff requested compensation for actual damages, the costs of corrective advertising to restore their brand identity, and reasonable licensing fees. Additionally, asserting that the infringement was willful and intentional, Vegadelphia sought the disgorgement of profits the Defendants had earned from the infringing sales and requested that the Court enhance these monetary awards.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

Plaintiff(s): Sonate Corporation, d/b/a Vegadelphia Foods.

· Experts for Plaintiff: Sidney P. Blum

Defendant(s): Beyond Meat, Inc.

· Experts for Defendant(s): Richard J. George

Claims

The Plaintiff grounded its case on allegations of Federal Trademark Infringement under the Lanham Act. Vegadelphia argued that the slogan "GREAT TASTE PLANT-BASED" was visually and phonetically indistinguishable from their protected mark, particularly highlighting similarities in font style, stacked text layout, and green color schemes used in the Defendants' branding. A critical component of their claim involved Beyond Meat's prior knowledge; the Plaintiff presented evidence that Beyond Meat had applied to register "PLANT-BASED GREAT TASTE" in March 2019 but abandoned the application after the USPTO cited Vegadelphia's mark as a barrier. Vegadelphia argued that proceeding with the campaign despite this rejection demonstrated a willful disregard for their intellectual property rights.

Defense

Dunkin' Brands and Beyond Meat denied the allegations of infringement. In their answer to the complaint, the defense admitted to collaborating on the campaign and using the disputed phrase but rejected the assertion that it created consumer confusion or infringed on Vegadelphia's rights. They raised several affirmative defenses to counter the claims. The defense argued the doctrine of laches, claiming Vegadelphia had inexcusably delayed filing the lawsuit for nearly three years, which purportedly prejudiced the Defendants. Additionally, they asserted waiver, suggesting that the Plaintiff had failed to enforce its rights against other third-party users in the past. The structure of the verdict form implies the defense also relied heavily on the argument of "fair use," likely contending that their use of the words was descriptive of the food products rather than a use of the slogan as a trademark.

Jury Verdict

On November 25, 2025, the jury returned a comprehensive verdict in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, ruling decisively in favor of Sonate Corporation (Vegadelphia).

Liability for Infringement

The jurors unanimously determined that Beyond Meat’s use of the slogan "PLANT BASED GREAT TASTE" had infringed upon Vegadelphia’s registered trademark "WHERE GREAT TASTE IS PLANT BASED" in violation of the Lanham Act. The jury explicitly rejected the defense's argument that this usage constituted "fair use". Furthermore, the jury found that the use of the variation "GREAT TASTE PLANT BASED" by Beyond Meat and Dunkin’ also infringed on the Plaintiff's trademark rights and similarly did not qualify as fair use. Consequently, the jury held Beyond Meat liable for trademark infringement regarding both specific slogans.

Financial Damages and Penalties

Having established liability, the jury awarded substantial monetary compensation to Vegadelphia. They determined that Vegadelphia was entitled to $23.5 million in actual damages to reasonably compensate the company for the harm caused by Beyond Meat’s infringement.

In addition to actual damages, the jury addressed the issue of disgorgement of profits. For the infringement involving the slogan "PLANT BASED GREAT TASTE," the jury calculated that Beyond Meat had generated $109 million in profits attributable to the infringing use. From this amount, the jury awarded Vegadelphia an additional $15.4 million as a measure to fairly compensate the Plaintiff for harm not covered by the actual damages. Regarding the slogan "GREAT TASTE PLANT BASED," the jury calculated the attributable profits to be $5.4 million.

Findings on Willfulness and Competition

The verdict included critical findings regarding the nature of the Defendants' conduct and market position. The jury confirmed that Vegadelphia’s products directly competed in the marketplace with Beyond Meat’s products marketed under both infringing slogans. Most significantly, the jurors found that Beyond Meat’s infringing use of both "PLANT BASED GREAT TASTE" and "GREAT TASTE PLANT BASED" was willful. This determination of willfulness validated the Plaintiff's claims that the Defendants had knowingly disregarded Vegadelphia's established rights during their nationwide advertising campaign.

Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com