Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Sycamore

Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Sycamore

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

March 18, 2022, Filed

No. 18-4062, No. 19-4031, No. 19-4040

Opinion

 [*1254]  EID, Circuit Judge.

These consolidated appeals concern claims of unfair competition in the bread industry. Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. ("Bimbo Bakeries") owns, bakes, and sells Grandma Sycamore's Home-Maid Bread ("Grandma Sycamore's"). Bimbo Bakeries alleges that United States Bakery ("U.S. Bakery"), a competitor, and Leland Sycamore ("Leland"), the baker who developed the Grandma Sycamore's recipe, misappropriated its trade secret for making Grandma Sycamore's. Bimbo Bakeries further claims that U.S. Bakery infringed upon Grandma Sycamore's trade dress when it sold a comparable bread product, [**2]  Grandma Emilie's, and engaged in false advertising when it used the tagline "Fresh. Local. Quality." The district court granted summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bakery on the trade dress infringement claim. The parties went to trial on the other two claims, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of Bimbo Bakeries on both. After the trial, the district court denied U.S. Bakery's and Leland's renewed motions for judgment as a matter of law on the trade secrets misappropriation and false advertising claims. The district court did, however, remit the jury's damages award.

Bimbo Bakeries, U.S. Bakery, and Leland all appeal. Bimbo Bakeries argues the district court should not have granted U.S.  [*1255]  Bakery summary judgment on its trade dress infringement claim and should not have remitted damages for the false advertising claim. U.S. Bakery and Leland argue the district court should have granted their renewed motions for judgment as a matter of law, and Leland makes additional arguments related to his personal liability. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion because all Bimbo Bakeries' claims fail as [**3]  a matter of law.

In 1979, Leland Sycamore developed the recipe and process for making Grandma Sycamore's Home-Maid Bread. As the name suggests, Grandma Sycamore's seeks to emulate bread made at home—for example, the bread is baked in a special pan so that two loaves can be pulled apart, giving the bread a "breakaway side"—and falls under the commercial category of homemade bread products. See U.S. Bakery Aplt. Br. at 4. The bread has been immensely popular in Utah. Leland parted with his interest in Grandma Sycamore's in 1998 and opened his own bakery, which became Wild Grains Bakery LLC ("Wild Grains Bakery"), with his son Tyler. By 2013, EarthGrains Baking Companies, Inc. ("EarthGrains") owned the rights to the bread.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

39 F.4th 1250 *; 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 7104 **

BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., Plaintiff - Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. LELAND SYCAMORE, Defendant - Appellant/Cross-Appellee.BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LELAND SYCAMORE; UNITED STATES BAKERY, Defendants - Appellees.BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LELAND SYCAMORE, Defendant, and UNITED STATES BAKERY, Defendant - Appellant.

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00749-DN).

Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Sycamore, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114075, 2017 WL 3089011 (D. Utah, Apr. 28, 2017)Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Sycamore, 29 F.4th 630, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 27667 (10th Cir. Utah, Mar. 18, 2022)Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Sycamore, 372 F. Supp. 3d 1291, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36040, 2019 WL 1058234 (D. Utah, Mar. 5, 2019)

CORE TERMS

Bakery, bread, baked, trade secret, trade dress, tagline, district court, products, temperature, readily ascertainable, Fresh, matter of law, packaging, false advertising, consumers, purported, advertising, misappropriation, proofing, yeast, potato flour, misleading, marks, statement of facts, renew a motion, white bread, ingredient, homemade, generic, damages

Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, Appropriateness, Judgments, Entitlement as Matter of Law, Appellate Review, Standards of Review, Genuine Disputes, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Business & Corporate Compliance, Federal Unfair Competition Law, Trade Dress Protection, Causes of Action, Trademark Law, Infringement Actions, Burdens of Proof, Subject Matter of Trademarks, Labels, Packaging & Trade Dress, Elements of Trade Dress Infringement, Lanham Act, Scope, Eligibility for Trademark Protection, Distinctiveness, Evidence of Distinctiveness, Terms Requiring Secondary Meaning, Descriptive & Laudatory Terms, Determinations of Protectability, Terms With Inherent Distinctiveness, Suggestive Terms, Defenses, Genericness, Similarity of Marks, Appearance, Meaning & Sound, Meaning, Appellate Briefs, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review, Pleading & Practice, Motion Practice, Content & Form, Opposing Memoranda, Trials, Judgment as Matter of Law, Postverdict Judgment, Trade Secrets Law, Protection of Secrecy, Duty to Safeguard, Trade Secrets Law, Misappropriation Actions, Definitions of Misappropriation, Trade Secret Determination Factors, Economic Value, Generally Known, Ready Availability, Elements of Misappropriation, Confidentiality, Existence & Ownership, Civil Actions, Antitrust & Trade Law, Consumer Protection, Likelihood of Confusion, False Designation of Origin, Particular Subject Matter, Geographic Terms, Terms Ineligible for Protection, False Advertising, Elements of False Advertising, Lanham Act, Consumer Confusion, Surveys as Evidence of Confusion, State Regulation