Large Tea Company Sues Small Cannabis Shop Over ‘Stash’ Name

David versus Goliath?

One of the nation’s largest specialty tea companies is suing a small Oregon marijuana shop for trademark infringement over use of the name “Stash.”

The Stash Tea Co. in Tigard, a Portland, Oregon suburb, accuses the Stash Cannabis Co. in nearby Beaverton of “systematic infringement of trademarks owned by Stash Tea,” Willamette Week reported. Stash Cannabis sells  medical and recreational marijuana.

In a lawsuit filed on April 20, Stash Tea also charges that Stash Cannabis hurts the tea company’s brand “by misappropriating and using the likenesses of Stash Tea’s trademarks in connection with the sale of marijuana, and marijuana-related products and services.”

Stash Tea’s trademark extends to the sale of “dried plants and tea,” Willamette Week reported. Stash Tea is seeking an injunction, legal costs, and damages that include profits. The marijuana store recently said its sales were $3,000 to $4,000 a day.

Stash Cannabis owner Chris Matthews told Willamette Week he’s hired a trademark lawyer to defend his company and that he doesn’t believe his business, which opened last September, affects that of Stash Tea.

The late beverage entrepreneur Steven Smith, who also founded Tazo Tea Co., founded Stash Tea in 1972. The Yamamotoyama Tea Co. of Japan acquired Stash Tea in 1993.

Latest Headlines

2 comments on “Large Tea Company Sues Small Cannabis Shop Over ‘Stash’ Name
  1. spam on

    GW Pharmaceuticals sent a cease and desist letter to a Washington state licensed producer using the name GW Pharms, Good Weed Pharms as if the pharmaceutical company uses phonetics to sell their dank.
    But for Stash to claim a counter-culture term as proprietary is bogus. For them to seek profits from the company is just the way of Asian capitalism.

  2. Barbara on

    I believe you should not have used the “stash” name. The name is trademarked and as we enter the markets we must use care not to infringe on trademarks. Good business practices would have had you look up trademarks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *