Background
The case centers on the phrase “MORE THAN AN ATHLETE,” associated with NBA superstar LeBron James’s brand. DeAndra Alex’s company began using the phrase in commerce no later than May 2013. Game Plan, Inc. filed a federal trademark application in December 2016 and obtained a registration.
Uninterrupted IP, LLC — the entity affiliated with LeBron James and his SpringHill Company — acquired DeAndra Alex’s common law rights through an asset purchase agreement and then filed a cancellation proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) against Game Plan’s registration. The core question was whether Uninterrupted IP’s acquired common law rights, predating Game Plan’s filing date, could serve as the basis for cancellation — even though Uninterrupted IP obtained those rights by assignment after the cancellation proceeding had commenced.
The Rulings Below
The TTAB granted the cancellation petition, finding that Uninterrupted IP validly succeeded to DeAndra Alex’s priority rights through the assignment and that those rights predated Game Plan’s filing date. The Federal Circuit affirmed, rejecting Game Plan’s arguments that an assignment of trademark rights mid-proceeding was improper or that it violated the Lanham Act’s requirements. The court found no statutory provision barring such an assignment.
Game Plan petitioned the Supreme Court to resolve the question of whether common law rights acquired during an inter partes cancellation proceeding can defeat a federal registration. The Supreme Court denied cert on June 22, 2026, leaving the Federal Circuit’s ruling intact.
Key Takeaways
- Common law priority predates registration priority. A federal registration does not automatically trump older common law rights. If another party can show use in commerce before your filing date, that prior use can cancel your registration.
- Trademark rights can be assigned mid-litigation. The Federal Circuit held that acquiring trademark rights through an asset purchase — even after a cancellation proceeding has started — does not automatically disqualify the acquirer from asserting those rights as petitioner.
- Registration is not an iron shield. Federal trademark registration carries a presumption of validity, but that presumption can be overcome by evidence of prior common law use. Companies relying on registration alone should audit whether prior common law users exist in the market.
Why It Matters
For brand owners and IP acquirers, this case underscores the complex interplay between federal registration and common law trademark rights. When a company acquires a brand or the assets of a business, it also acquires the trademark priority date that came with those assets — and that date can be used offensively to challenge later federal registrations. The ruling is particularly relevant in brand acquisitions and IP portfolio transactions, where acquiring legacy common law rights is now a recognized legal strategy for clearing existing registrations that might otherwise block use of the acquired mark.