Suit over alleged copying of SanDisk Cruzer Blade flash drive and SD card trade dress by XANIVO-branded products. After Defendant No.1 filed affidavits undertaking not to reuse the impugned packaging, the court decreed the suit for permanent injunction on consent and ordered 50% refund of court fees.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 13.11.2025
versus
M/S. WELBORN INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.
.....Defendants
Through: Mr. Shahid Khan, Mr. Shubham Jain, Mr. Mohit Mudgal & Mr. Shubham Rajput, Advocates for D-1.
%
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
Case set up in the Plaint
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 1 of 12
Signature Not Verified
Signed 1 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
leading products such as solid-state drives [‘SSDs’] and embedded storage solutions for consumer electronics, enterprise storage, and data centres. 3.1. The Plaintiff’s product portfolio includes, but is not limited to, Universal Serial Bus [‘USB’] flash drives, Secure Digital [‘SD’] and microSD cards, SSDs, and embedded storage solutions designed for smartphones, tablets, cameras, gaming consoles and enterprise data centres. 3.2. The Plaintiff has been selling its products in the Indian market since 2005 under the SanDisk trademarks. Plaintiff’s earliest trademark registration is for the word mark SanDisk, bearing TM No. 1249761 in Class 9, registered on 14.11.2003. The Plaintiff also holds a subsequent
registration for the device mark , bearing TM No. 2632942 in Class 9, with a registration date of 25.11.2013 [‘Plaintiff’s trademarks’]. Details of Plaintiff’s trademark registrations have been set out in paragraph ‘9’ of the plaint.
3.3. Plaintiff’s global turnover accrued in terms of the sale of its products is Rs. 102.09 crores globally in 2023. The Plaintiff has incurred advertising expenses to the tune of Rs. 57.27 crores globally in 2023.
3.4. Additionally, SanDisk has been published as a well-known trademark by the Indian Trademark Office in its official list of well-known trademarks on 18.03.2024.
3.5. The subject matter of the present suit pertains to the USB Flash Drives, in particular the SanDisk Cruzer Blade flash drives [‘Plaintiff’s flash drives’], and the SanDisk Extreme Pro, SanDisk Ultra and Ultra Plus range of SD cards [‘Plaintiff’s SD cards’] manufactured and sold by the Plaintiff.
Knowledge about Defendant no. 1
3.6. In February 2025, the Plaintiff learnt that Defendant No.1/M/s.
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 2 of 12
Signature Not Verified Signed 2 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
Wellborn Industries Private Limited is engaged in the trading and sale of camera accessories and related equipment.
3.7. Defendant no.2/Directorate General of Foreign Trade is a ProForma Defendant, which has been impleaded by the Plaintiff seeking information pertaining to import records and customs documentation of Defendant no. 1. 3.8. Defendant No.1 is selling products under its sub-brand XANIVO bearing a deceptively similar trade dress [‘impugned products’] as that of the Plaintiff’s products, in particular, the Plaintiff’s flash drives and the Plaintiff’s SD cards.
3.9. Defendant No.1 is promoting its impugned products on various social media platforms and on e-commerce websites such as Amazon.
3.10. Defendant No.1 has also applied for registration in 2024 for two [2] trademarks qua XANIVO in class 9. Details of Defendant No.1’ trademark applications have been set out in paragraph ‘40’ of the plaint.
3.11. Defendant No.1 has blatantly copied several elements of the Plaintiff’s trade dress, such as the colour scheme, unique layout, typography, shape, etc., which, when put together, create a distinct commercial impression. A comparative table demonstrating the copying and malicious adoption by Defendant No.1 has been set out in paragraph ‘50’ of the plaint. 3.12. Being aggrieved by the Defendant’s use of an identical packaging, the Plaintiff filed the present suit.
Court’s Findings
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 3 of 12
Signature Not Verified Signed 3 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
Counsel for Defendant No. 1 entered appearance on 08.07.2025 and submitted that it has discontinued the impugned packaging since March 2025 and has adopted a new packaging/trade dress. It was further submitted that Defendant No. 1 has no intention to use the impugned packaging in the future. The said submission was taken on record, and Defendant No. 1 was directed to file an affidavit in this regard.
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 4 of 12
Signature Not Verified
Signed 4 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
2025, i.e. prior to the institution of the present suit. That Defendant No. 1 has since adopted and launched new packaging for its 'XANIVO' branded products, which is visually distinct, dissimilar, and devoid of any of the features alleged by the Plaintiff to be infringing. The new packaging utilises a completely redesigned layout, typography, and visual identity, and ensures that there is no likelihood of confusion. Representative images of the newly adopted packaging are produced below:
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 5 of 12
Signature Not Verified Signed 5 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
Signature Not Verified
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 6 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
be distinct and dissimilar to that of the Plaintiff's products, and shall not in any manner mislead or deceive the public.
CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 7 of 12
Signature Not Verified Signed 7 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 8 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 9 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
(a) An order of permanent injunction restraining Defendant No.1 or any other person acting for and on their behalf from manufacturing, and/or selling, offering for sale, distributing, advertising and/or in any manner whatsoever dealing in the infringing products, ‘XANIVO USB FLASH DRIVES’, ‘XANIVO BOLT SDXC UHS – I CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE SDXC – UHS-1 CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE PRO SDXC – UHS – II CARD’, bearing the impugned trade dress, and/ or from dealing in any other product which may have a trade dress similar to the Plaintiff’s trade dress in its ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’,
Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 10 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
packaging, and ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’ product shape, and the packaging in the ‘SanDisk Extreme PRO, ‘SanDisk Ultra’, ‘SanDisk Ultra Plus’ line of products, such that it amounts to an infringement of the Plaintiff’s copyright subsisting in the packaging and trade dress of their ‘Cruzer Blade’ flash drives and, ‘Ultra and Ultra Plus’, and ‘Extreme PRO’ line of products.
(b) An order of permanent injunction restraining Defendant No.1 or any other person acting for and on his behalf from manufacturing, and/or selling, offering for sale, distributing, advertising and/or in any manner whatsoever dealing in the infringing products, ‘XANIVO USB FLASH DRIVES’, ‘XANIVO BOLT SDXC UHS – I CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE SDXC – UHS-1 CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE PRO SDXC – UHS – II CARD’, bearing the impugned trade dress, and/ or from dealing in any other product which may have a trade dress similar to the Plaintiff’s trade dress in its ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’, packaging, and ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’ product shape, and the packaging in the ‘SanDisk Extreme PRO, ‘SanDisk Ultra’, ‘SanDisk Ultra Plus’ line of products, such that it amounts to an infringement of the Plaintiff’s registered trademarks;
(c) An order of permanent injunction restraining Defendant No.1 or any other person acting for and on his behalf from manufacturing, and/or selling, offering for sale, distributing, advertising and/or in any manner whatsoever dealing in the infringing products, ‘XANIVO USB FLASH DRIVES’, ‘XANIVO BOLT SDXC UHS – I CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE SDXC – UHS-1 CARD’, ‘XANIVO BLAZE PRO SDXC – UHS – II CARD’, bearing the impugned trade dress, and/ or from dealing in any other product which may have a trade dress similar to the Plaintiff’s trade dress in its ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’, packaging, and ‘SanDisk Cruzer Blade’ product shape, and the packaging in the ‘SanDisk Extreme PRO, ‘SanDisk Ultra’, ‘SanDisk Ultra Plus’ line of products, such that it amounts to passing off, of Defendant No.1’s products as that of the Plaintiff’s’.
Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 11 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
are dismissed as not pressed.
Refund of Court fees
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
NOVEMBER 13, 2025/ gm/aa
Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 448/2025 Page Signed 12 of 12 By:RASHMI DABAS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Defendant No.1's undertakings to cease use of the impugned trade dress warranted decree of the suit for permanent injunction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sandisk LLC
M/s. Welborn Industries Private Limited
Directorate General of Foreign Trade
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
As recorded by the court registry
A suit of a commercial nature above the specified value, governed by the Commercial Courts Act 2015.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
