New Era Obtains Judgement to Block Lamar Jackson’s ‘ERA 8’ Trademark Application After Six-Year Legal Fight
New Era has succeeded in blocking Baltimore Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson’s attempt to register the trademark ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON,’ ending a legal battle that stretched for nearly six years.
The legal battle began because New Era claimed that the trademark ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ infringed on its trademark rights.
On September 16, 2020, New Era filed the case with the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (also known as the ‘TTAB‘). This is an administrative court within the USPTO that can rule on cases regarding whether a trademark can be registered.
The TTAB’s ruling was just issued on August 27, 2026.
And, after all this time, the TTAB’s ruling did not even answer the question at the heart of the dispute:
Whether or not Jackson’s ‘ERA 8’ brand is too similar to New Era’s trademarks.
Instead, Jackson lost on procedural grounds, with the TTAB finding that Jackson’s failure to respond to New Era’s challenge on a previous trademark application prevents Jackson from ever attempting to register the ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ trademark again.
A Dispute Dating Back to 2019
Our story actually did not start with this particular application.
Prior to the dispute at hand, Jackson first applied to register ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ in February 2019.
That application covered two groups of products:
- Athletic bags, backpacks, duffle bags, and sports bags
- Bottoms as clothing, footwear, headwear, jackets, shirts, tops as clothing, and undergarments
New Era opposed the application.
Jackson never filed an Answer in that proceeding, and the TTAB entered a default judgment against him.
Then, on March 16, 2020, Jackson filed another application for ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON,’ which included many of the same products:
- Athletic bags, backpacks, duffel bags, sport bags, carry-on bags, and traveling bags
- Bottoms as clothing, footwear, headwear, tops as clothing, and undergarments
New Era opposed again (and this is the case the TTAB just ruled on).
This time, New Era argued that Jackson should not be allowed to relitigate a dispute it had already won.
In the decision issued in late August, the TTAB agreed, as its board of judges applied the legal doctrine of claim preclusion, also known as res judicata.
Under that doctrine, a final judgment in one proceeding can prevent the same parties from litigating the same claim again.
The TTAB found that the default judgment entered against Jackson in the first opposition qualified as a final judgment on the merits for purposes of claim preclusion.
That meant Jackson could not simply file another application for ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ covering the same trademark and products and start over.
Jackson’s Arguments Against Claim Preclusion
Jackson made three main arguments for why New Era should not be able to use “claim preclusion” to block his new application.
1. The 2020 Application Included Additional Products
In the new application, Jackson included carry-on bags and traveling bags. These products were not subject to the original proceeding, meaning claim preclusion did not apply to them.
The TTAB agreed with Jackson on this point, but found that Jackson had improperly claimed those goods were “in commercial use” when filing the application. Therefore, the TTAB found the application could not proceed for those goods because of the improper statement in the application.
2. His Growing Fame Changed the ‘ERA 8’ Brand’s Circumstances
Jackson argued that the circumstances surrounding his career and the ‘ERA 8’ brand had materially changed since the 2019 default judgment.
Since then, his No. 8 jersey was retired by the University of Louisville. He signed a five-year, $260 million contract extension in April 2023 and continued adding to his career achievements, which included another league MVP award.
Essentially, Jackson argued that trademark rights are not static and that the TTAB should consider these intervening developments when evaluating claim preclusion.
The TTAB was not persuaded.
The judges concluded that Jackson’s professional achievements did not create the kind of material change necessary to overcome claim preclusion.
For example, circumstances may materially change if a trademark that was previously ineligible for registration later acquires distinctiveness through continued use.
But that was not the situation here. Despite Jackson’s growing fame, the underlying trademark claim remained fundamentally the same.
3. He Was Never Informed About the Original Opposition
Jackson claimed that his former counsel never notified him of New Era’s opposition to his first application.
That argument failed as well.
The TTAB found that an attorney’s alleged failure to notify a client about an opposition does not eliminate the consequences of a resulting default judgment.
It noted that trademark applicants are ultimately responsible for monitoring the status of their applications, even when represented by counsel.
As a result of these findings, the TTAB ruled in favor of New Era and issued a judgment finding that Jackson may not register his ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ trademark.
Analysis: Jackson Lost This Round, But the ‘ERA 8’ Trademark Fight Continues
The most important thing about this decision is what the TTAB didn’t decide.
The TTAB did not determine that ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON’ is confusingly similar to ‘NEW ERA.’ It only decided the case on procedural grounds.
That makes this an unusual trademark case.
Six years of litigation ultimately ended without the USPTO deciding what many would consider the central trademark question: Does Jackson’s ‘ERA 8’ trademark infringe on New Era’s trademark rights?
What happens next?
Of all things, Jackson has a separate trademark application for ‘ERA 8’ by itself.
New Era has opposed that application as well.
The TTAB has already found that because ‘ERA 8’ is a different trademark from ‘ERA 8 BY LAMAR JACKSON,’ claim preclusion will not apply to that case.
That means the dispute can finally move beyond the procedural issues and address the trademark question at the heart of this six-year fight:
Does Jackson’s ‘ERA 8’ trademark infringe on New Era’s trademark rights?
Josh Gerben, Esq.
Josh Gerben, Esq. is a nationally recognized trademark attorney and the founder of Gerben IP. Since launching the firm in 2008, he has overseen the registration of over 10,000 trademarks and handled over 1,500 trademark disputes. Josh's practice focuses on building and defending global trademark portfolios for clients. These clients include entrepreneurs, private equity-backed businesses, athletes, celebrities, and public companies. Frequently quoted by major media outlets like CNBC, CNN, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal, Josh is widely regarded as a leading authority in trademark law.
Do you need assistance with a trademark matter?
Contact an Attorney Today