This term, the Supreme Court in Mission Product Holdings v. Tempnology, is set to resolve a circuit split over whether a trademark licensee may continue to use licensed marks where the licensor, as a debtor-in-possession in a bankruptcy proceeding, rejects the license agreement. No. 17-1657 (U.S.).

In In re Tempnology, the First Circuit held that where a debtor-in-possession licensor rejects a license agreement, the licensee may no longer use the licensed trademarks, and may instead claim damages. See 879 F.3d 389 (1st Cir. 2018). In so holding, the First Circuit followed Fourth Circuit precedent, see Lubrizol Enterprises v. Richmond Metal Finishers, 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir. 1985), and declined to follow Seventh Circuit precedent allowing the licensee to continue to use the marks after the licensor’s rejection of the agreement, see Sunbeam Products v. Chicago American Manufacturing, 686 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2012).