Arrgh: Pirate Joe's And Trader Joe's Are Once Again Locked In Legal Battle 
 
 Enlarge this image toggle caption _irate Joe's _irate Joe's 
 
 The battle of the Joes isn't over yet. 
 
 On one hand, you have Trader Joe's — the U.S. grocery chain with a bit of a cult following for its quirky, exclusive products. 
 
 On the other hand, you have Pirate Joe's — the Canadian "gray market" grocery shop that sells Trader Joe's goods picked up in America and trucked across the border to Vancouver. There, at a significant markup, they're sold to Trader Joe's enthusiasts who don't fancy the thought of a border-crossing grocery run. 
 
 In 2013, Trader Joe's sued Pirate Joe's, complaining that the resale operation hurt Trader Joe's brand. (In response, the Canadian shop changed its name to _irate Joe's.) 
 
 A U.S. district court dismissed the lawsuit, noting that there were no Trader Joe's open in Canada and that Pirate Joe's, for its part, didn't sell any goods in the U.S. The judge said she couldn't see any economic harm the U.S. chain could be suffering. 
 
 Pirate Joe's celebrated by handing out chocolate-covered almonds. 
 
 But the U.S. grocery giant appealed the dismissal, and on Friday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Trader and against Pirate. That doesn't mean the reseller is out of business, but does mean the case is no longer dismissed: It's back at the district court for further proceedings. 
 
 The appellate court's decision focused on the fact that Trader Joe's is very particular about quality control and can't dictate how Pirate Joe's ships or stores goods. 
 
 That leads to a very real risk of quality deterioration, the three-judge panel found — so the district judge shouldn't have rejected the possibility of a risk to the Trader Joe's brand. 
 
 "There is nothing implausible about the concern that Trader Joe's will suffer a tarnished reputation and resultant monetary harm in the United States from contaminated goods sold in Canada," Judge Morgan Christen wrote in the decision. "Incidents of food-born illness regularly make international news, and Trader Joe's alleges that it is aware of at least one customer who became sick after consuming food sold by Pirate Joe's." 
 
 That's an allegation that's strongly denied by Pirate Joe's owner Mike Hallatt, who says the alleged item was a meat product and that he never resells anything with meat in it. A Trader Joe's spokeswoman told NPR the company doesn't comment on pending litigation. 
 
 Enlarge this image toggle caption Mike Hallatt Mike Hallatt 
 
 In general, Hallatt tells NPR he finds the whole lawsuit fairly ridiculous. 
 
 "For the courts to take this seriously, it's just lost on me," he says. "I buy up the stuff, retail, full monty — I own it, I get to do with it whatever I want to and I just happen to want to sell it to my friends in Canada." 
 
 Hallatt hasn't backed away from his business in the years since the 2013 lawsuit dismissal. In fact, he just relocated to a new shop, now named "Super Pirate Joe's." He says he plans to add a cafe, which would sell — perhaps you guessed it — Trader Joe's food, straight out of the packaging and onto a plate. 
 
 He says there's been a silver lining to the 9th Circuit decision, businesswise. 
 
 "There's a lot of anxious customers now who are buying more stuff because they think maybe this is the end," he says. 
 
 Hallatt, for his part, isn't worried that the end is nigh. He says he is confident that he would come out on top in a full trial. 
 
 Which isn't to say he's eager about the legal slog that might be ahead of him. 
 
 "Honestly, I think Trader Joe's should just open a store in Canada and put me out of my misery," he says. "People in Canada just want their stuff." 

 Court Reinstates Trader Joe's Copycat Claims 
 
 (CN) — The Ninth Circuit gave Trader Joe's the green light to pursue a federal trademark claim against the owner of accused Canadian knockoff Pirate Joe's. 
 
 The decision overturns a district court ruling dismissing the grocery chain's lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction. 
 
 Trader Joe's sued Michael Hallatt in 2013 under the Lanham Act and Washington state law. 
 
 Hallatt, a Canadian who has U.S. permanent-resident immigration status, spent more than $350,000 buying Trader Joe's branded products to resell in Canada, according to the grocer. 
 
 He allegedly visited a Trader Joe's just over the Canadian border in Washington several times a week, buying large quantities of goods. Trader Joe's learned Hallatt was buying the products to sell at his Canadian store Transilvania Trading, which he later renamed Pirate Joe's. 
 
 The company demanded Hallatt stop reselling Trader Joe's products from Pirate Joe's but he refused, court records show. 
 
 When Trader Joe's stopped selling to Hallatt, he started dressing in "disguises to shop at Trader Joe's without detection" and drove to Seattle, Portland and California to buy branded products, according to Trader Joe's complaint. 
 
 Trader Joe's claimed Hallatt used its trademarks and trade dress, operated a website accessible from the U.S. and designed his store to mimic a Trader Joe's. 
 
 The grocer's complaint says Hallatt violated the Lanham Act and Washington law and asks the district court to permanently enjoin Hallatt from reselling goods or using Trader Joe's trademarks in Canada. 
 
 U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. 
 
 On Friday, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit revived the federal trademark claims but affirmed the dismissal of the state-law claims. 
 
 The panel found the extraterritorial reach of the Lanham Act raises a question relating to the merits of a trademark claim, not to federal courts' subject-matter jurisdiction. On the merits, Trader Joe's allegations were enough to warrant extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act, according to the ruling. 
 
 Judge Morgan Christen, writing the unanimous decision, said Trader Joe's claims established jurisdiction because they could affect U.S. commerce. 
 
 For example, Hallatt transports the goods without using proper quality-control measures, which could harm Trader Joe's "domestic reputation and diminish the value of its American-held marks," according to the ruling. 
 
 The panel upheld the dismissal of state trademark claims because Trader Joe's does not allege trademark violations occurred in Washington. 
 
 The Ninth Circuit also affirmed dismissal of state Consumer Protection Act violations because Hallatt is not a Washington resident, Trader Joe's is a California corporation, and the alleged conduct did not plausibly harm Washington residents. 
 
 The panel remanded the case back to district court on the federal trademark claims. 
 
 Hallatt's attorney, Nathan Alexander of Dorsey & Whitney in Seattle, told the Associated Press that he and Hallatt disagreed with the ruling and they are evaluating their options.
– The "renegade" grocery store bringing Canadians a taste of Trader Joe's might be in jeopardy once again: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a 2013 lawsuit the US grocery store brought against Pirate Joe's—a Vancouver, BC, store run by Michael Hallatt, who buys goods at Trader Joe's across the border, then sells them for a profit in Canada, where Trader Joe's doesn't operate, per the Guardian. A US judge initially dismissed the suit, arguing Trader Joe's couldn't prove Hallatt was affecting its business. But while a three-judge panel upheld the dismissal of certain claims from that suit on Friday, it allowed the case to continue on federal trademark claims in a unanimous decision, per Courthouse News. Stressing that Hallatt transports products across the border without proper quality control measures, Judge Morgan Christen writes that Trader Joe's could "suffer a tarnished reputation and resultant monetary harm in the United States from contaminated goods sold in Canada," per NPR. "Trader Joe's alleges that it is aware of at least one customer who became sick after consuming food sold by Pirate Joe's," he adds. Hallatt denies selling the item in question and says the whole suit is silly. "I buy up the stuff … I own it, I get to do with it whatever I want to and I just happen to want to sell it to my friends in Canada," he says. "Honestly, I think Trader Joe's should just open a store in Canada and put me out of my misery." (Trader Joe's is accused of stealing a cookie.)