Background
Two competing Philadelphia wine education schools have been locked in an escalating dispute over the name “Philly Wine School.” PhillyWine LLC — originally founded in 1999 by Neal Ewing and now owned by Matt Kirkland (a Penn surgeon) and Noelle Allen (a banking executive and certified wine educator) — is accredited by the Wine & Spirits Education Trust and offers internationally recognized wine certification courses.
The Wine School of Philadelphia, founded in 2001 by Keith Wallace, operates from a permanent location at 109 South 22nd Street and offers wine tastings and sommelier courses. In December 2025, Wallace obtained a federal trademark registration for “Philly Wine School” (Application No. 98869526), claiming acquired distinctiveness through nearly two decades of use. After registration, Wallace submitted complaints to Instagram, Google, and Squarespace, asserting that PhillyWine LLC’s use of similar branding infringed the mark.
PhillyWine LLC filed suit in February 2026, alleging the trademark was fraudulently obtained and seeking an emergency preliminary injunction to prevent the Wine School of Philadelphia from enforcing it.
The Court’s Holding
In a 36-page ruling, Judge Wolson denied the preliminary injunction. The court found that PhillyWine LLC failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because the evidence showed the Wine School of Philadelphia had substantially deeper roots in using the “Philly Wine School” name.
Critically, media coverage had referred to the Wine School of Philadelphia as “Philly Wine School” since at least 2005, and the school had used the phrase consistently in its own promotional materials for close to a decade. By contrast, PhillyWine LLC’s use of the specific phrase was “sporadic” until the last couple of years, and the company had primarily operated under a different name.
The court also rejected PhillyWine’s characterization of Wallace’s trademark enforcement actions as bad-faith cyberbullying, finding instead that the enforcement was an effort “to assert and resolve competing claims rather than to create confusion.” Wallace had offered to restore PhillyWine LLC’s suspended Instagram account if it agreed to stop using the infringing handle — evidence of good-faith enforcement rather than predatory intent.
Key Takeaways
- Continuous, documented use matters more than formal business names. The Wine School of Philadelphia never officially operated as “Philly Wine School,” but years of media coverage and promotional use under that shorthand established a stronger association than PhillyWine LLC’s more recent adoption.
- Sporadic use is not enough for a PI. PhillyWine LLC’s admission that it had not regularly used the disputed phrase undermined its claim to superior rights, even though its predecessor entity had been in business since 1999.
- Trademark enforcement ≠ cyberbullying. The court drew a clear line between legitimate trademark enforcement (filing complaints with platforms, seeking to resolve disputes) and anticompetitive conduct.
Why It Matters
This case illustrates a common trap for small businesses: assuming that a long-established brand name automatically translates to trademark rights in all variations of that name. PhillyWine LLC had deep roots in the Philadelphia wine education market, but its intermittent use of the specific phrase “Philly Wine School” left it vulnerable when a competitor with more consistent use secured federal registration.
For business owners, the lesson is straightforward — consistent, documented use of your brand name matters. If a competitor registers a variation of your name and you want to challenge it, you need evidence of regular, public use, not just occasional references. The court’s refusal to treat platform enforcement actions as bad faith also signals that trademark owners can pursue takedown requests on social media without fear that doing so will be characterized as harassment.