WWE & Fanatics file to dismiss Cody Rhodes ‘American Nightmare’ trademark lawsuit

Image: WWE

In new documents filed Friday, both WWE and Fanatics are attempting to have a court dismiss a trademark lawsuit regarding Cody Rhodes’ use of the “American Nightmare” phrase.

The initial lawsuit was filed in September by Wesley Eisold, the lead singer and co-founder of the band American Nightmare who has held a trademark for the term since 2016 for use in “music, clothing and entertainment services.” Filed in California, the lawsuit alleges trademark infringement, breach of contract, and intentional interference with contractual relations.

First reported by Brandon Thurston, WWE and Fanatics are seeking to dismiss based on the premise that any “American Nightmare” text appears alongside the well-known skull logo Rhodes has tattooed on his neck that is also a registered trademark. By doing so, they feel they are meeting the conditions of Rhodes and Eisold’s previous settlement.

That settlement came after a March 2019 dispute for $30,000 when Rhodes applied for the trademark for wrestling-related activities. The terms were that Rhodes could use the term on merchandise “under the condition that such items prominently used Rhodes’ name, likeness, or wrestling-related imagery in a size at least 75% larger than the ‘American Nightmare’ text.”

One item Eisold claimed was evidence of any confusion between his band and WWE was a “Crown” t-shirt that doesn’t feature imagery of Rhodes or wrestling but uses the term instead. Eisold’s legal team reached out to Rhodes’ legal team in 2022 about the shirt, but claimed they never were responded to. Eisold’s team then sent cease and desist letters to both Rhodes and Fanatics in April and May 2024 with Fanatics referring them to WWE.

Rhodes was also named in the lawsuit, but has separate legal representation from WWE and Fanatics. However, Thurston reported that his legal team filed a joinder to the motion “which indicates Rhodes supports the WWE and Fanatics legal arguments and is asking the judge to apply the same reasoning to Eisold’s claims against him.”