Grady Memorial Hospital Corp. v. Gradybaby Apparel LLC et al, Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-00960-SCJ (N.D. Ga., Mar. 6, 2023)

Grady Memorial Hospital has brought suit in the Northern District to stop the unauthorized use of the mark “GRADY BABY” on clothing. In its Complaint, Grady Memorial claims ownership over the rights in the “GRADY” mark, in part stemming from their incontestable registered mark “GRADY HEALTH SYSTEM.”

“Grady Memorial Hospital and people in the Greater Atlanta area have used the phrase “Grady Baby” for many years to refer to children born at Grady Memorial Hospital, such that the phrase “Grady Baby” is associated throughout the community with Grady Memorial Hospital and its birthing services. For many years, well prior to any use by any Defendant, Grady Memorial Hospital has used the term “Grady Baby” as a trademark on apparel such as onesies and T-shirts as well as other items provided to patients in reference to children born at Grady Memorial Hospital.”

Complaint, at 5.

In an unexpected twist, the Complaint leverages the Defendants’ own allegations made in a similar suit filed in July 2022. The earlier litigation, Gradybaby Apparel LLC et al v. Grady Baby Company and Apparel LLC et al, Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-02681-CAP (N.D. Ga. July 7, 2022), was a trademark dispute between the present suit’s defendants. In the July 2022 suit, the then-plaintiffs alleged to have used “GRADY BABY” and “GRADY BABY APPAREL” in commerce since at least as early as 2010 in connection with their businesses selling printed consumer goods. And, they accused the then-defendants of unlawfully using the marks for soft consumer goods and fraudulently filing an intent-to-use application for “GRADY BABY” under Class 25-Clothing. The mark indeed registered on March 22, 2022, as U.S. Registration No. 6,679,866.

The present Complaint seeks cancellation of the trademark registration for “GRADY BABY,” and includes counts for federal and common law trademark infringement, and violation of Georgia’s Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Antidilution Statute.

The case has been assigned to Judge Steve Jones.