United States: Trademark Licensee Retains Rights Post-Rejection

The Bottom Line

The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut in In re Sima Int'l, Inc., Case No. 17-21761, 2018 WL 2293705  (Bankr. D. Conn. May 17, 2018), recently held that rejection of a license agreement did not terminate the licensee's right to use the trademarks or enforce its exclusivity rights. In so holding, the court adopted a plain language reading of Section 365(g) and 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code and found, respectively, that rejection of an executory contract is a breach, not a termination, and therefore the contractual rights of the trademark licensee remained in place post-rejection and the licensee's exclusivity rights were preserved.  The case adds to the split among courts over whether the Bankruptcy Code's protections of "intellectual property" rights extend to "trademarks" which are not expressly included in the Code.  With the increased prominence of the potential value of intellectual property rights in bankruptcy cases – such as liquidating retailers with well-known brands – this decision underscores the potential limitations on capturing that value through seeking to assign trademarks to new parties.

What Happened?

The Debtor was the sole and exclusive owner of certain copyrights, trademarks and other intellectual property relating to a unique System for Identifying Motivated Abilities ("SIMA®"). The Debtor entered into licensing with various parties, allowing those parties to use the intellectual property to create or develop derivative works, modifications, revisions or improvements. Pursuant to the Licensing Agreement between the Debtor and Marlys Hanson, Inc. ("MHI"), the Debtor would license, inter alia, all intellectual property associated with SIMA®, which included the trademarks and copyrights therein, to MHI for purposes of developing "adaptations." In exchange, the Debtor would receive royalties from MHI's gross revenues generated from the developed product.  Under the License Agreement, MHI maintained an exclusive right to develop software involving the SIMA® technology and neither the Debtor nor any third party could engage in upgrading or improving the software.

The Debtor filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and shortly thereafter, the Chapter 7 Trustee filed a motion seeking to reject the Licensing Agreement pursuant to Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code.  The Trustee contended that the continuing obligations under the License Agreement were burdensome and rejection would likely enhance the value of the license in a bankruptcy sale. MHI objected, seeking to retain its rights to the License Agreement under Section 365(n)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code.  The parties disagreed on (a) whether Section 365(n) entitled MHI to the continued use of the SIMA® trademark and (b) whether MHI's election preserved its exclusive rights under Section 6 of the License Agreement, which limits the parties' ability to sell or enter into any agreement with any other person for developing, manufacturing or selling a competing product.

Section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code limits a debtor's ability to terminate intellectual property licenses.  Specifically, when the contract to be rejected is one "under which the debtor is a licensor of a right to intellectual property," the licensee may elect to "retain its rights . . .  to such intellectual property," thereby continuing the debtor's duty to license the intellectual property. 11 U.S.C. § 365(n)(1). 

The court first considered the legislative history behind Section 365(n), noting that it was enacted in response to Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir. 1985), which held that upon rejection, a licensee could not retain any of its contractual rights under a technology license and thus, the licensee was stripped of all rights of use it previously held under the agreement. The court noted that Section 365(n) was enacted to allow a licensee to retain its licensed rights for the rejected contract's duration, as such rights existed immediately prior to the bankruptcy.

As an initial matter, the court found that the Trustee's business judgment was entitled to deference and approved the motion to reject. The court next found that MHI had properly elected to retain its rights under Section 365(n) by filing its responsive pleading.  The court then turned to whether MHI's Section 365(n) election entitled it to use the SIMA® trademark post-rejection. A key aspect of the dispute was whether the protection of Section 365(n) extends specifically to "trademarks."  Section 365(n) protects the interests of a licensee of "intellectual property."  "Intellectual property," in turn, as defined by the Bankruptcy Code – Section 101(35A) – does not expressly include trademarks; instead, it includes patents, copyrights and trade secrets.  To address whether the protection should be expanded to include "trademarks," the court noted the circuit split over whether a trademark licensee can continue to retain the license post-rejection of the agreement. On the one hand, the Seventh Circuit, in Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. Chicago American Manufacturing, LLC, 686 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2012), employed a "plain language reading" approach, and held that a licensee is allowed to retain rights to the debtor's trademark post-rejection. On the other, the First Circuit recently held in In re Tempnology, LLC, 879 F.3d 389 (1st Cir. 2018), that the rejection by a debtor-licensor of a trademark stripped the licensee of its right to use the trademark post-rejection.  The decision reviews the various cases across the circuits (which we won't belabor here) examining a trademark licensee's rights post-rejection.  After reviewing various decisional authority, the court here aligned itself with the Seventh Circuit and agreed with Judge Turruella's dissent in Tempnology, stating that the First Circuit's statutory construction was contrary to Congress' explicit efforts to "rebalance affected rights on intellectual property and leave Section 365(g) to answer otherwise unresolved trademark issues." Under Section 365(g), the rejection of a contract not previously assumed constitutes a breach. To determine the parties' rights regarding the License Agreement and the breach, the court looks to applicable state law. Under Connecticut law, a counter-party is relieved of continued performance under a contract if the breach is material. A material breach has been defined as one that would justify the other party to suspend his own performance of the contract. Here, the court found that under Connecticut state law, the estate's rejection breach was not material and thus, the counter-party was not relieved of continued performance under the contract.  In doing so, the court reasoned that the "Section 365(n) election indisputably preserves MHI's right to the intellectual property and exclusivity, therefore, the core of the bargain and substantial purpose of the License Agreement has been preserved. Neither Section 365(g) applying state law, nor Section 365(n), provide a basis to terminate MHI's equally central and bargained-for rights in the SIMA® trademark."

Finally, the court concluded that Section 365(n)(1)(B) allowed MHI to retain its exclusivity rights to prevent the development of "competing products."  The court found that by its own terms, Section 365(n)(1)(B) allows MHI "to retain its rights (including a right to enforce any exclusivity provision of such contract) . . . under such contract and under any agreement supplementary to such contract, to such intellectual property (including any embodiment of such intellectual property to the extent protected by applicable non-bankruptcy law)." 11 U.S.C. § 365(n). The court distinguished the First Circuit's holding in Tempnology on this issue as inapposite stating that there, the issue was an exclusive distribution argument by the non-debtor. In contrast, here, the License Agreement embodies precisely the kind of exclusive intellectual property rights that are protected by 11 U.S.C § 365 (n)(1)(B).

Why This Case Is Interesting

The court declined to follow the recent First Circuit ruling in In re Tempnology, and aligned itself with the Seventh Circuit in permitting the trademark licensee to retain rights post-rejection.  As noted in a prior blog article on the First Circuit's ruling in In re Tempnology, trademarks can be a valuable right for certain distressed businesses. The Bankruptcy Code is often a balancing act – sometimes advancing rules that allow the estate to unlock value from assets limited as a matter of non-bankruptcy law and other times protecting the investment of non-debtors who transact with debtors and risk losing their investment in their property interest.  This latest decision sides with the trademark licensee and prevents the debtor's estate from walking away from pre-bankruptcy licenses and entering into new post-petition agreements.  For some debtors (like retailers or other well-known product branded owners), trademarks can be a valuable asset. The impact of prepetition license arrangements on that value may be key to whether these marks can be a potential recovery source for creditors.  It will be interesting to see whether the Second Circuit gets an opportunity to rule on this issue and take a side.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions