Like many other famous and successful people, Tiger Woods is no stranger to lawsuits. The current slate of IP lawsuits he is facing, however, are not about Woods the man, but rather his businesses.
His clothing line Sun Day Red (SDR), which launched in February 2024, was hit with two lawsuits in the span of four months. And his new virtual golf league, TGL, is also embroiled in multiple lawsuits against LA Golf Partners LLC (Partners), a golf equipment maker, over the use of “LA Golf Club.”
Let’s take a look at what is happening in each of these cases.
When Is a Leaping Cat Just a Leaping Cat?
The cases against Sun Day Red are due to the clothing line’s distinctive logo: a leaping tiger made up of 15 lines that are meant “to honor Woods’s 15 major championships.” Due to how those lines are represented, the logo is closer to a tiger skeleton or a stick figure representation rather than a fully fleshed-out tiger.
Back on September 25, 2024, the athletic cooling product business Tigeraire filed a notice of opposition against Sun Day Red before the US Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) arguing that Woods’ clothing line had “unlawfully hijacked” their design. Both designs feature black and white leaping tigers facing the same direction, with their legs and tail similarly positioned. Tigeraire’s logo, however, was registered in 2022, and the company claims it has been in use for five years.
Sun Day Red responded by filing a Complaint for Declaratory Relief on September 26, 2024 against Tigeraire in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which is still ongoing. The following day, Tigeraire filed a Complaint for Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, and Louisiana State Causes of Action against Sun Day Red in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
The opposition case before the TTAB has been suspended due to the civil cases. The case in the Middle District of Louisiana has been temporarily stayed and administratively closed until the Central District of California court has issued a ruling on Sun Day Red’s Motion to Enjoin Later Filed Litigation.
Apparently, the parties attempted to negotiate a settlement, but Sun Day Red accused Tigeraire of making “outrageous monetary demands.” So we wait for a decision from the Central District of California.
Separately, in early January 2025, the sports apparel company Puma filed a Notice of Opposition against Sun Day Red before the TTAB, arguing that the SDR logo is too close to their leaping cat logo, which has been in use since 1969. Though their logo has some distinctive differences – the cat is solid, with no stripes, and leaping in the opposite direction – Puma argued that consumer confusion was likely due to the similarity of the brands’ offerings.
Puma has strong brand recognition. Its mark is extremely well-known and has been in wide use for decades. These are factors that are seriously considered by the USPTO.
Of course, the cases should not impact each other, but it is a bit much to be defending multiple trademark cases in different courts and jurisdictions. Tigeraire’s bigger worry as a local startup from Louisiana is likely that the deeper pockets of SDR will prove difficult for them to match.
LA Golf Club Vs. LA Golf Partners
We mentioned above that Woods’ TGL virtual golf league filed a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment against LA Golf Partners, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware over the use of “LA Golf Club.” This happened on January 6, 2025. There is a lot to unpack here.
First, this filing was something of a preemptive measure by TGL, essentially asking the court to declare that it is fine for them to use “LA Golf Club” in association with a team in their league, the entity known as LA Golf Club Inc. Why did they go to this trouble? Because Partners was threatening them with a lawsuit if they kept using the name.
On January 30, 2025, LA Golf Partners, LLC filed a Complaint for Trademark Infringement and other claims against TGL Golf Holdings, LLC. Summons have been issued, but the court record does not show the Summons as served yet. Because of this, it is too soon to know what will happen in this case.
Here is the interesting part: LA Golf Partners only just obtained a trademark registration for LA Golf Club on December 17, 2024. Moreover, it is registered only on the Supplemental Register, which is for merely descriptive marks and was created to help businesses block similar descriptive marks from being registered.
So this is another situation of two separate lawsuits filed in two different US District Courts over the same merely descriptive trademark. Since these cases are in the early stages, we just have to watch and see what happens.
Are There Any Lessons to Learn Here?
One possible way to reduce the chances of the “LA Golf Club” situation occurring would have been to choose a more distinctive mark. As mentioned earlier, the current mark could refer to any golf club in Los Angeles – regardless of whether it is associated with Partners or a huge new virtual league like TGL. A fanciful or arbitrary name could have prevented another business from claiming infringement.
The leaping cat logo lawsuits might have been avoided with more research into similar logos – particularly for businesses in similar industries – and then choosing something more distinctive. Even if Woods was set on using a tiger (for understandable reasons), one can imagine that there were other ways to portray that tiger to make it distinct from existing logos.
Of course, all of these things seem obvious in retrospect, but they are easy to miss when you are in the middle of trying to create a brand. That is why it is so useful to have your marketing team work with an experienced IP attorney who can help provide guidance and clearance searches throughout the process.