Smucker Sues Trader Joe’s Over ‘Uncrustables’ Look-Alike Sandwiches
The J.M. Smucker Co. has initiated a federal lawsuit against Trader Joe’s, accusing the popular grocery chain of trademark infringement. At the heart of the dispute are Trader Joe’s recently launched frozen peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, which Smucker alleges are strikingly similar in design and packaging to its immensely popular Uncrustables brand.
The Details of the Lawsuit
Filed in a federal court in Ohio this week, the lawsuit details Smucker’s grievances. The Orrville, Ohio-based conglomerate claims Trader Joe’s round, crustless PB&J sandwiches feature the distinctive pie-like crimped edges that have become a hallmark of Uncrustables. Furthermore, Smucker points to the blue hue used for the lettering on Trader Joe’s sandwich boxes, arguing it directly infringes on the blue packaging associated with Uncrustables. Even a bite mark depicted on Trader Joe’s packaging is cited as too similar to Uncrustables’ marketing.
Smucker’s Stance and Demands
Smucker emphasizes that its objection isn’t to competition in the frozen sandwich market, but to the alleged appropriation of its unique intellectual property. The company is seeking restitution and a court order to compel Trader Joe’s to hand over all infringing products and packaging for destruction.
The Uncrustables Journey: From Idea to Billion-Dollar Brand
The Uncrustables story began in 1996 in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, where two friends first conceived the sealed, crustless sandwich. Smucker acquired their company in 1998 and secured patents for the innovative “sealed, crustless sandwich” in 1999. Mass production proved challenging, necessitating significant investment. Over the past two decades, Smucker has poured more than $1 billion into developing the Uncrustables brand, perfecting its signature stretchy bread and expanding its flavor portfolio to include popular varieties like chocolate and hazelnut. This substantial investment underscores the brand’s value to the company.
Legal Expert Weighs In
Michael Kelber, chair of the intellectual property group at Chicago-based law firm Neal Gerber Eisenberg, notes that Smucker’s registered trademarks will strengthen its position. However, Trader Joe’s may counter by arguing that the crimped edges serve a functional purpose (sealing the sandwich) rather than being a protectable design element. Kelber also points out a subtle difference: Trader Joe’s sandwiches appear slightly more square than Uncrustables, a detail the defense could leverage. A key aspect in such cases, according to Kelber, is whether the alleged copycat product genuinely misleads consumers.
Precedents and the Importance of Enforcement
Smucker’s lawsuit includes evidence of potential consumer confusion, referencing social media posts where individuals mistakenly believed Trader Joe’s was a private-label manufacturer for Smucker. This isn’t Smucker’s first foray into protecting its brand. In 2022, it issued a cease and desist letter to Gallant Tiger, a Minnesota company producing similar upscale crustless PB&J sandwiches. Smucker confirmed it continues to monitor Gallant Tiger, suggesting a pattern of vigilant intellectual property enforcement. Kelber stressed the importance of enforcement for brand owners: “If they ignore Trader Joe’s, they are feeding that, and then the next person who does it they won’t have an argument.”
This legal skirmish echoes a recent lawsuit filed by Mondelez International against Aldi, alleging similar packaging infringement for store-brand cookies and crackers that resembled iconic brands like Oreos, Chips Ahoy, and Wheat Thins. Trademark disputes of this nature frequently conclude with settlements, as both parties often seek to avoid the substantial costs and prolonged nature of a full trial.
