Panda Express Opposes Trademark For ‘Trash Panda Vegan’ Food Truck

from the panda-fight! dept

Here we go again. In so many of these trademark disputes, the disputer far too often is wielding overly broad trademarks granted by the USPTO to suggest that having that registered mark is all they need to shut down the use of those broad terms by others. Nowhere do you find any claims of actual customer confusion. Half the time you don’t even get any real explanation as to why there is a concern for such confusion. It’s all just “Mine. Mine! MINE!”

That appears to be the case in a story in which Panda Express is opposing the trademark application for a single food truck in Arizona called “Trash Panda Vegan.”

Chef Krystal Mack is the owner of Trash Panda Vegan, a truck located in South Phoenix that she started during the COVID-19 pandemic. She prides herself on serving plant-based comfort food to her community, like burgers, hot dogs, mac & cheese, wings, and salads. 

Months after Mack filed a trademark for her business in 2022, she learned that Panda Express, which serves American-Chinese food, claimed that her logo and name are close to their brand, 12 News reported. Both logos include a panda, but Mack’s is more of a cartoon eating out of the trash and holding a burger.

The pictures do that last bit a lot more justice than plain text. The branding is nothing alike to Panda Express. The color schemes are different, the images are different, and the “Trash Panda” text isn’t even the largest font in the schema. See for yourself.

There’s simply no way there is going to be any confusion in the marketplace over whether the food truck has anything to do with Panda Express. None.

And then there’s this.

“Panda Restaurant Group owns the trademark for the word ‘Panda’ for use in any restaurant service and have engaged in standard industry practice necessary to keep this trademark legally intact,” a statement from the Panda Food Group said.

It sure doesn’t appear that way based on some simple Google searching I did just now. We have the Panda Chinese Restaurant, Panda House, and Panda China. And those are just the first three examples I pulled after searching around for five minutes. Whatever the motivation behind opposing the mark for this food truck is, it most certainly cannot be said to be Panda Express’ successful policing of all uses of “panda” in trademarks for food services.

But trademark bullying typically works, especially in cases like this, where one entity has a vastly outsized legal war chest compared with the victim. So, while Mack wants to fight this and secure his trademark, she has to rely on crowdsourcing the funds to do so.

And given how spurious this opposition is, that’s a damned shame.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: panda express, trash panda vegan

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Panda Express Opposes Trademark For ‘Trash Panda Vegan’ Food Truck”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
35 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

you can’t define such a vague concept as “unethical business practice”

long existing Contract Law protections against fraud and coercion are effective

Nobody can possibly protect consumers against all dishonest people in society

what mechanism protects you from dishonest politicians or media outlets ?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

…that depends on the unethical business practice being done.

Unfortunately, the exact thing being abused here is patent law, which SHOULD protect brands from being abused, but it’s become a vector of lawfare for corps to bully the small business owner.

AS for defining “mechanisms” that protect the little guy from the likes of dishonest news networks and politicians, it goes from “boycotts”, “vote the dishonest fucker out”, “a shitton of civil disobedience”, to things frowned upon like “the Second Amendment”, and the worst-case scenario, “warfare”.

People prefer to NOT go for the violent approaches where possible, if that’s what you’re suggesting.

And your implied suggestion, “roll over and get abused”, while a valid philosophical position to take, is just as reprehensible to people.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

TRADEMARK is a Federal grant of monopoly economic control of a ‘NAME’ subjectively chosen for ill-defined categories personal/organpizational/business entities and their associated activities.

Congress created TRADEMARK concept from thin air as special interest favor to some big businesses at the time, to hinder their competition

neither Trademark nor Federal authority to issue trademarks is anywhere in the US Constitution.

andrea iravani says:

Re: Re:

That is correct. If Crystal Mack had named her business Panda X-Press and had the same logo, Panda Express would have a legitimate case. The names are completely different, the logos are completly different, the menues are completely different, and the business model is completely different. Will adding store, mall, grocer, restaurant, bar and grill to any establishments name be trade mark violations?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
mrtraver (profile) says:

No association...until now

In my locale, we have used “trash pandas” to refer to raccoons for literally as long as I can remember, well before the chain Panda Express was established. I had not ever associated Panda Express with raccoons, but now I can never disassociate them. Thanks for ruining raccoons for me.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
HotHead (profile) says:

“Panda Restaurant Group owns the trademark for the word ‘Panda’ for use in any restaurant service and have engaged in standard industry practice

When I read insane statements like that I wish I could declassify- oops, I mean, disbar lawyers with my mind.

I certainly hope law schools aren’t purposefully teaching students to think that trademark law is “I own words in the dictionary”. If your trademark relies uses regular words then it’s kinda your fault if someone else happens to use some of the same words. And trademark confusion over regular words doesn’t happen very often anyway.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

This. “We own this word when it is used in conjunction with anything we touch or might even think about.”

Panda Toilet Tissue? Why, no, we print a panda on our napkins. Panda Shirt Factory? Oh hell no, we have apanda somewhere on employee uniforms.

Shut up, we just own words now. Yanked from the ancient public domain.

andrea iravani says:

Re:

Panda Express is trying to claim that but they really do not have a legitimate case in my opinion. Their shoddy attorney tried to claim that by having a disclaimer on “Express” , however the Trade Mark word was Panda Express, Not Panda and not Express. Not having a disclaimer on the word Panda does not mean that they have the sole use of the word Panda or that no other business would be able to use it. They probably tried to, and they were probably not allowed to, the trade mark does not say 1.) Panda, 2.) Panda Express.

This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Panda Express = Trash, message recieved

Well I hadn’t associated ‘Panda Express’ with ‘trash’ before now, but if they really think there’s such a large potential for confusion clearly they think someone will see the phrase ‘trash panda’ and think of them so who am I to disagree?

Anonymous Coward says:

It sure doesn’t appear that way based on some simple Google searching I did just now. We have the Panda Chinese Restaurant, Panda House, and Panda China.

Poking about in TESS for a few minutes, I did find a couple of restaurant-related trademarks using the word “Panda” that the Panda Restaurant Group didn’t own, but not many. And looking at the number that they DO own, they are certainly trying to own the word Panda for restaurant services, at least.

Personally I think they’d have a better shot at success if their logo was a raccoon and not a panda because then they could argue the term “trash panda” being a slang reference, but it is at least possible they might pull it off anyway if they can afford the fight.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...