Snoop Dogg is locked in a federal courtroom conflict with Edible Arrangements over a single phrase, “Swizzle,” which now threatens the way forward for his ice cream model.

The Hip-Hop icon’s dessert enterprise, Bosslady Foods LLC, has filed a lawsuit in Connecticut, accusing Edible Arrangements of making an attempt to push his firm out of the frozen deal with market by claiming unique rights to the time period “Swizzle.”

The dispute facilities on the Tropical Sherbet Swizzle taste from Snoop Dogg’s Dr. Bombay ice cream line, which is offered in main retailers together with Walmart and Kroger.

Edible Arrangements, recognized for its chocolate-covered fruit bouquets, has held logos involving “Swizzle” for greater than ten years.

After Bosslady debuted the sherbet in 2023, Edible fired off cease-and-desist letters and later challenged the corporate’s trademark software, threatening to “vigorously enforce” its rights.

Bosslady’s authorized workforce argues Edible’s claims don’t maintain up. They assert that the “Swizzle” mark solely applies to chocolate-dipped fruit, not frozen desserts and demand that the time period is simply too generic to be trademarked.

The firm states that “swizzle” has lengthy been used within the meals business to explain drizzled syrup and that Edible misled the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by failing to reveal that others had already used the time period.

Bosslady’s legal professional, Todd S. Sharinn, pointed to entrepreneur Shari Fitzpatrick, founding father of Shari’s Berries, as the unique supply of the time period.

“By her own account, Shari Fitzpatrick—the owner of Shari’s Berries and Berried in Chocolate, among others—came up with the term ‘swizzle’ one day while drizzling chocolate syrup on fruit,” Sharinn stated.

He added, “Fitzpatrick did not use or register the ‘swizzle’ term as a trademark, opting instead to place it into the public domain as a signifier for the act of decoratively drizzling syrup on fruit and other foodstuffs, as well as the resulting ‘swizzle’ design or pattern thereby created.”

The lawsuit claims Edible falsely advised the USPTO that nobody else had the proper to make use of the “Swizzle” mark, regardless of missing any license or permission from Fitzpatrick.

Snoop Dogg’s firm Bosslady accuses Edible of making an attempt to monopolize the frozen dessert area by threatening to launch its personal Swizzle-branded ice cream.

The grievance additionally references Edible’s previous authorized battles with firms like 1-800-Flowers and Fresh Fruit Bouquet Company, portraying the model as a serial filer of lawsuits aimed toward stifling competitors.

Bosslady is asking the court docket to cancel six of Edible’s logos, block the corporate from utilizing “Swizzle” on ice cream, and award financial damages.

Related