Garten of Banban creators face US IP suit as competing KITTYSAURUS claims emerge

A newly filed federal lawsuit involving the creators of Garten of Banban has brought competing KITTYSAURUS trademark claims into focus, although the available court records do not yet establish that the name is the specific subject of the litigation.

The creators of the horror-themed video game franchise Garten of Banban are facing a new intellectual property lawsuit in the US, as trademark records reveal an intriguing overlap between Euphoric Brothers Ltd.’s KITTYSAURUS application and an older federal registration owned by plaintiff Kyle Weinandy.

Weinandy filed Weinandy v. Euphoric Brothers LTD et al., No. 2:26-cv-00334, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on August 10, naming Euphoric Brothers Ltd. and Badr Ahmed and Faris Ahmed as defendants. The docket identifies trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114 among the causes of action.

However, the publicly available docket information does not currently provide enough detail from Weinandy’s 115-page complaint to establish conclusively that KITTYSAURUS is the trademark at issue. The connection is instead suggested by the parties’ overlapping trademark records and Euphoric Brothers’ commercial use of the name.

Two KITTYSAURUS portfolios

Euphoric Brothers filed US trademark application No. 98/243,534 for KITTYSAURUS on October 27, 2023. The application covers goods in Class 25, including clothing and headwear, and Class 28, including toys and games such as action figures, collectible figures, plush toys, board games, card games, and puzzles. The application identifies Euphoric Brothers Ltd. as the applicant.

The application claims use of KITTYSAURUS in commerce dating to January 6, 2023. The available trademark record describes it as a live, pending application, and it has not matured into a federal registration.

Weinandy, meanwhile, has a much older federal KITTYSAURUS registration. US Registration No. 5,137,855 originated from application No. 86/106,282, filed on October 31, 2013. The registration therefore predates Euphoric Brothers’ application by approximately a decade.

Weinandy also filed a series of additional KITTYSAURUS applications in October and November 2023. These include application No. 98/235,422, filed October 23, 2023, covering stationery and printed matter including children’s books, activity books, coloring books, and a series of printed fiction books. The application describes a stylized Kittysaurus character combining a cat and a dinosaur.

Other Weinandy KITTYSAURUS applications filed around the same period cover additional categories of goods, including kitchenware and household containers. The trademark records show multiple live/pending applications alongside the older federal registration.

The Garten of Banban connection

The potential trademark collision becomes more interesting because Euphoric Brothers uses “Kittysaurus” commercially within the Garten of Banban gaming ecosystem.

Apple’s App Store listing for Garten of Banban: Punchrush identifies Euphoric Brothers LTD as the developer and lists “Kittysaurus” among the game’s in-app purchases. This provides direct evidence of Euphoric Brothers’ commercial use of the name in connection with its gaming activities.

The broader trademark record also shows Euphoric Brothers pursuing US trademark protection for numerous names associated with its gaming properties, including GARTEN OF BANBAN, BANBAN, NABNAB, OPILA BIRD, CAPTAIN FIDDLES, and KITTYSAURUS.

The overlap is therefore potentially significant from an entertainment and gaming perspective. On one side is Weinandy’s earlier federal KITTYSAURUS registration; on the other is a contemporary gaming company that has sought protection for KITTYSAURUS and uses the name commercially within the Garten of Banban ecosystem.

What the trademark records actually show

The trademark records do not, by themselves, establish that either party has an exclusive right to use KITTYSAURUS across every category of goods or entertainment.

Weinandy’s older registration and Euphoric Brothers’ later application cover different goods. The scope of any enforceable rights would therefore depend on the precise identifications of goods and services, the parties’ respective uses and the applicable likelihood-of-confusion analysis, among other factors.

The chronology is nevertheless notable. Weinandy’s federal registration traces back to a 2013 application, while Euphoric Brothers did not file its KITTYSAURUS application until October 2023.

Several additional Weinandy applications were filed in the weeks immediately preceding and following Euphoric Brothers’ October 27 filing. That timing is a matter of public record, but it does not establish that the filings were connected or that either party was responding to the other.

Euphoric Brothers’ application also remains a live, pending application rather than a federal registration.

The unanswered question

The most important issue for now is what Weinandy is actually alleging against Euphoric Brothers.

The federal case identifies a claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, but the publicly available docket information reviewed for this report does not provide sufficient detail to say that KITTYSAURUS is definitively the mark underlying that claim.

That distinction is important. It would be premature to describe the litigation itself as a confirmed KITTYSAURUS trademark dispute until the complaint and its exhibits can be reviewed.

The USPTO prosecution histories may also provide important context. In particular, the examination history of Euphoric Brothers’ 2023 application could reveal whether Weinandy’s earlier registration or later KITTYSAURUS applications were identified during prosecution. Any such record would need to be reviewed before drawing conclusions about the parties’ knowledge or intentions.

For now, the available evidence establishes an unusual trademark overlap: an older federal KITTYSAURUS registration, a series of later applications by the same owner, a 2023 KITTYSAURUS application filed by the creators of Garten of Banban, and commercial use of the name within the gaming franchise.

Whether that overlap is actually at the heart of the newly filed lawsuit remains to be established.

The Trademark Lawyer and The Patent Lawyer will continue to monitor the case as the complaint and further court filings become available.

← Back to News