Nathan and Sons' copyright suit against Larine over Underbrush gum packaging and video ads moves from Colorado to the Southern District of Texas

The case

Nathan & Sons, LLC v. Larine, LLC, No. 4:26-cv-09823 (S.D. Tex., Houston Division), arrived in Houston on November 9, 2026, by transfer from the District of Colorado, where Nathan and Sons, LLC filed it on April 23, 2026 as No. 1:26-cv-01740 against Strategic Nexus, LLC. On June 18, 2026, the Colorado court granted Nathan's motion to substitute Larine LLC as the defendant and to file a first amended complaint. That complaint alleges that Strategic Nexus, a New Jersey limited liability company based in Point Pleasant, New Jersey, merged into Larine LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on April 15, 2026, and that Larine succeeded to its liabilities. It describes Nathan as a Wyoming limited liability company with its principal place of business in Denver, Colorado. The Texas docket shows the case assigned to Judge Charles R. Eskridge III. (FAC paras. 10, 13 to 15; D. Colo. ECF No. 14.)

The works and the registered trade dress

The complaint concerns the packaging and short-form video advertisements for Nathan's Underbrush remineralizing gum. Copyright Office records list Nathan & Sons, LLC as claimant on three registrations, all dated April 22, 2026: VA 2-497-946, titled "Packaging," for 2-D artwork first published May 16, 2023, with a record note that the basis for registration is pictorial and graphic features capable of existing independently of the utilitarian aspects of a useful article; PA 2-579-734, a motion picture titled "Nathan.and.sons 4.18.24" and first published April 18, 2024; and PA 2-579-737, a motion picture first published September 2, 2024.

USPTO records show Registration No. 8,331,508, issued July 7, 2026 on the Principal Register to Nathan and Sons LLC, for a mark the registration describes as a three-dimensional configuration of product packaging for chewing gum, with the color brown claimed, covering chewing gum in Class 30.

The allegations

Nathan alleges that it sells remineralizing underbrush gum and ranked as high as the eighth highest-grossing brand on TikTok Shop. It alleges that beginning in or around the fall of 2024, the defendant sold a product in packaging identical to Nathan's packaging except that Nathan's name was replaced with the defendant's, and that even after introducing its own branded packaging, the defendant kept using Nathan's copyrighted artwork on inner packaging components. It alleges that the defendant repeatedly downloaded Nathan's TikTok videos and republished them as paid advertisements on Meta platforms and other channels as its own, that at least two were original Nathan advertisements protected by copyright, and that many of the ads drew more than one million views. (FAC paras. 2, 21 to 36.)

The complaint also alleges that a test purchase and laboratory analysis showed the defendant's product contained almost no xylitol and included ingredients not listed on its box, and it calls the product "a sugar-cube-like substance that is not chewing gum." It alleges false advertising through AI-generated "dentists" and fabricated professional endorsements, logos of major publications implying media coverage, customer and review claims inconsistent with third-party platforms, and paid affiliates who disparaged Nathan's products. (FAC paras. 28 to 31, 37 to 45.)

The claims and the amended pleadings

The first amended complaint pleads four counts: Count I, copyright infringement of the two registered advertisements; Count II, copyright infringement of the registered packaging design; Count III, false advertising and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); and Count IV, unfair competition and deceptive trade practices under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, C.R.S. § 6-1-101 et seq. It asks for a permanent injunction, an order to remove and recall false or misleading advertising, packaging, and other materials, actual, statutory, and exemplary damages, disgorgement of profits, attorneys' fees and costs under the Lanham Act and the Colorado statute, interest, and other relief. (FAC paras. 46 to 68; Request for Relief A to G.)

Nathan filed a second amended complaint on August 20, 2026, and, with the defendant's written consent, a third amended complaint on September 1, 2026, which is the operative pleading. The third amended complaint is not available. Nathan's notice of filing says it adds a single claim, Count VI, for infringement of the trade dress in Registration No. 8,331,508 under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, with the registration certificate as a new exhibit, and makes no other substantive change to the claims or allegations. (D. Colo. ECF No. 29, paras. 1 to 5.)

The transfer

On September 15, 2026, Larine moved to transfer or dismiss, asserting that the Colorado court lacked personal jurisdiction over it, and Nathan opposed. On October 26, 2026, the parties filed a joint stipulation stating that Nathan no longer opposed transfer to the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, and Larine stated that it is subject to personal jurisdiction there. On November 2, 2026, Judge Philip A. Brimmer granted the motion in part and transferred the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (D. Colo. ECF No. 34.)