Back to Blog
ITCMay 21, 2026·337-TA-3902·COMPLAINT FILED

Certain Energy Drinks and Labeling and Packaging Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-3902 (Violation)

U.S. International Trade Commission

Holding

Monster Energy Company filed a Section 337 complaint at the USITC against multiple respondents, including Gig Wholesale Corp. and Asialink NZ Limited, alleging trademark infringement arising from the importation and sale of unauthorized gray market Monster Energy drinks bearing four Monster trademarks (Reg. Nos. 6,760,278; 6,451,182; 2,903,214; and 3,434,821) that were manufactured in Poland, South Africa, and Serbia for distribution outside the United States.

Why It Matters

This investigation targets the growing gray market importation of foreign-market Monster Energy drinks that differ materially from U.S. domestic products in can size, nutritional content, labeling language, product codes, and regulatory warnings, potentially confusing U.S. consumers and undermining Monster's quality control and brand integrity. The case could result in a general exclusion order or limited exclusion order barring importation of these gray market products, setting a significant precedent for trademark owners seeking ITC relief against parallel importers of materially different goods. Monster's domestic industry is anchored in its U.S. manufacturing operations and extensive trademark licensing program.

Full Summary

Monster Energy Company filed a Section 337 complaint at the USITC against multiple respondents, including Gig Wholesale Corp. and Asialink NZ Limited, alleging trademark infringement arising from the importation and sale of unauthorized gray market Monster Energy drinks bearing four Monster trademarks (Reg. Nos. 6,760,278; 6,451,182; 2,903,214; and 3,434,821) that were manufactured in Poland, South Africa, and Serbia for distribution outside the United States. This investigation targets the growing gray market importation of foreign-market Monster Energy drinks that differ materially from U.S. domestic products in can size, nutritional content, labeling language, product codes, and regulatory warnings, potentially confusing U.S. consumers and undermining Monster's quality control and brand integrity. The case could result in a general exclusion order or limited exclusion order barring importation of these gray market products, setting a significant precedent for trademark owners seeking ITC relief against parallel importers of materially different goods. Monster's domestic industry is anchored in its U.S. manufacturing operations and extensive trademark licensing program. Four Monster trademarks asserted (Reg. Nos. 6,760,278; 6,451,182; 2,903,214; 3,434,821), two of which were assigned from Hansen's to Monster in January 2012. Accused products are gray market Monster Energy drinks produced in Poland, South Africa, and Serbia for non-U.S. markets, featuring material differences including 500mL cans vs. U.S. 16 fl. oz. cans, foreign-language labels, EAN barcodes incompatible with U.S. scanners, and differing nutritional content and warnings. No entity is licensed to import the accused products into the United States, and all genuine U.S.-market Monster Energy drinks are produced domestically, supporting both the trademark infringement theory and the domestic industry requirement.

Key Points

  • Four Monster trademarks asserted (Reg. Nos. 6,760,278; 6,451,182; 2,903,214; 3,434,821), two of which were assigned from Hansen's to Monster in January 2012.
  • Accused products are gray market Monster Energy drinks produced in Poland, South Africa, and Serbia for non-U.S. markets, featuring material differences including 500mL cans vs. U.S. 16 fl. oz. cans, foreign-language labels, EAN barcodes incompatible with U.S. scanners, and differing nutritional content and warnings.
  • No entity is licensed to import the accused products into the United States, and all genuine U.S.-market Monster Energy drinks are produced domestically, supporting both the trademark infringement theory and the domestic industry requirement.
infringementdomestic industryexclusion ordercease & desiststanding / jurisdiction

More on this topic