Beyond Meat’s $23.5M Trademark Damages Award Slashed to $37,500, but $15.4M Still Stands

A federal judge has reduced a $23.5 million trademark damages award against Beyond Meat to just $37,500, wiping out nearly all of Vegadelphia Foods’ claimed losses while leaving intact a separate $15.4 million award tied to Beyond Meat’s profits.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani entered judgment of $15,437,500 on September 18, down from the $38.9 million verdict a Massachusetts federal jury returned last year. Sonate Corporation, which does business as Vegadelphia Foods, accused Beyond Meat of infringing its registered “Where Great Taste is Plant Based” trademark.

Jurors found in November 2025 that Beyond Meat infringed the mark through its use of “Plant Based Great Taste” and “Great Taste Plant Based,” including advertising connected to a partnership with Dunkin’. They awarded Vegadelphia $23.5 million in actual damages and recommended another $15.4 million from Beyond Meat’s profits.

Trademark law treats those two forms of recovery differently. Actual damages compensate a trademark owner for losses tied to the infringement, while disgorgement allows a court to award some of the infringer’s profits. That distinction ultimately drove the sharp difference between the two awards.

Much of Vegadelphia’s $23.5 million damages theory centered on a proposed expansion known at trial as “Vegadelphia 2.0.” The company argued that Beyond Meat’s infringement cost it a business opportunity involving two food industry executives and a venture that could eventually have been sold at a substantial valuation.

Talwani found the projections too speculative to support the multimillion-dollar figure. The proposed venture remained preliminary, the parties never completed a final agreement and products planned for the expanded business were still under development.

Timing further weakened the connection between the trademark infringement and the proposed expansion. Beyond Meat began removing the challenged language after receiving a cease-and-desist letter in May 2020, while work toward a formal Vegadelphia 2.0 agreement began months later and continued into 2022.

A separate calculation supported the $15.4 million recovery. Jurors found that about $109 million in Beyond Meat profits were attributable to its use of “Plant Based Great Taste,” that the companies competed directly and that the infringement was willful.

Their recommendation gave Vegadelphia roughly 14% of those profits, or $15.4 million, as a measure of harm beyond the company’s proven lost profits. Talwani adopted that figure after finding it reasonably supported by the trial evidence.

Because disgorgement is an equitable remedy under the Lanham Act, the final amount rested with the judge. The jury’s findings on direct competition, willfulness and profits connected to the disputed slogan informed that decision.

Vegadelphia also sought another $10 million to $30 million through enhanced damages and additional disgorgement. Talwani kept the profit recovery at $15.4 million after concluding that amount adequately addressed unjust enrichment and deterrence, and she declined to add prejudgment interest.

Evidence at trial showed Beyond Meat learned of Vegadelphia’s registered mark in 2019 before continuing with the disputed slogans. The company maintained that its wording was descriptive and sufficiently different from Vegadelphia’s mark.

Beyond Meat began pulling the slogans from its marketing after Vegadelphia sent its cease-and-desist letter on May 28, 2020. Digital uses were removed first, while some physical marketing materials remained in circulation into early 2021.

The lawsuit was filed in Florida federal court in April 2022 against Beyond Meat and Dunkin’ over slogans used to market plant-based products. The case later moved to Massachusetts.

Dunkin’ settled with Vegadelphia in 2024 and was dismissed from the litigation. Beyond Meat remained in the case and argued that its use of the phrases qualified as descriptive fair use, a defense the jury rejected when it found federal trademark infringement.

Beyond Meat disclosed the reduced judgment in a September 22 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company said either side may pursue additional post-trial motions or an appeal.