A Nike Air Max 95 that nowhere shows the words “7-Eleven” and carries no convenience-store signage was sued before its release this summer. What 7-Eleven objected to was the band of orange, green and red stripes running across the shoe — a pattern it says it has used for close to forty years. On 19 October 2026 the chain filed a notice voluntarily dismissing the case with prejudice, ending the fight on its own motion.
The suit ran in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas Division, No. 3:26-cv-02201).
Suing on 1 July 2026, 7-Eleven noted that Nike had set the shoe’s release for 7/11 — the date it promotes as “7-Eleven Day” — and argued that the stripes were a confusingly similar imitation of its “Tri-Color Mark”, likely to mislead shoppers about the footwear’s source, sponsorship, endorsement or affiliation. It sought a permanent ban, treble damages and disgorgement of Nike’s profits. Yet it never claimed that Nike had copied its name or its logo.
Its theory was that a non-functional set of coloured stripes, released on the one date most tightly bound to the brand, was by itself enough to plant the impression of an official collaboration or a licensed tie-up. According to the complaint, 7-Eleven has used the “7-ELEVEN” mark since 1946 and the orange-green-red stripe pattern continuously and exclusively since 1987, and holds several U.S. registrations covering that colour combination, a number of them now incontestable.
Dismissing a case with prejudice means the plaintiff permanently gives up the claim and generally cannot sue again on the same facts — but it is the plaintiff’s own choice, not a court ruling on whether Nike infringed. The dismissal notice says nothing about a settlement, and Reuters likewise could not confirm whether the two sides had settled.
J&C recommends that, when you plan a cross-brand campaign, a limited colourway or a “homage” design, you look past the other side’s name and logo: a distinctive, non-functional combination of colours or patterns — paired with cues such as a release date or the surrounding marketing — can also support a claim of source confusion or false association. Before launch, put the colourway, the release date and the ad copy through a trademark risk check, not just a name-and-logo search.
Source: storage.courtlistener.com | storage.courtlistener.com
