Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Dirty Dough is firing back at its competitor in the continuing saga of Utah's cookie wars.
The cookie startup asked to file a counterclaim in a lawsuit initiated by Crumbl, claiming the legal battle has cost Dirty Dough money. The company is asking the court for financial relief from its competitor.
Dirty Dough said the two companies had a business relationship that "soured and ended" after Crumbl filed its lawsuit almost one year ago.
At this point, the cookie company has only asked Utah District Court Judge Howard C. Nelson Jr. to allow it to file the counterclaim past the deadline — but it included the counterclaim in the filing. Dirty Dough officials said they only recently discovered the information that led them to this decision.
Crumbl's recipe
The so-called "Utah cookie wars" began in May 2022 when Crumbl filed a federal lawsuit accusing rivals Dirty Dough and Crave Cookie Co. of what it calls "confusingly similar" logos, websites and other marketing materials. The lawsuit also accused Dirty Dough of copying recipes — claiming the founder's brother is a former Crumbl employee.
Crumbl's lawsuit details websites, packaging and menu features it believes Crave and Dirty Dough have taken from them. It includes sections with close-up pictures of cookies, a cookie logo with a bite taken out of it, long boxes that perfectly fit cookies side by side, and similar cookie recipes and presentation such as key lime cookies with white frosting and lime wedges on top or sugar cookies made with fruity cereal.
The lawsuit also claims that both rival businesses have copied Crumbl's "unique weekly rotating menu concept."
The lawsuit against Crave is also still ongoing; discovery in that case is set to end on April 24, and a jury trial is scheduled for early 2024.
Dirty Dough's recipe
The competition's counterclaim starts by pointing out that Crumbl has "hundreds of locations," generating "hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue" each year while Dirty Dough, as a small startup, had just three locations when the lawsuit was filed.
Dirty Dough alleges that Crumbl caused it financial harm by filing the lawsuit, including loss of investors, inability to obtain loans, legal costs and increased vendor costs.
The company also claims Crumbl filed the lawsuit against a company it saw as a direct competitor "without significant market share and with limited financial resources to fight their claims," and said Crumbl should have known the lawsuit would not succeed but filed it anyway "in an attempt to stifle growth and competition."
The company asked the court to allow it to seek money from Crumbl for the losses it has seen because of the lawsuit.
The counterclaim states that the two companies were neither the first nor the only companies to sell fresh cookies in fitted boxes, from brightly lit or modern stores, for delivery or in rotating menus.
It says the Dirty Dough product photographs shared in the initial lawsuit were posted before those that Crumbl claims it copied.
Dirty Dough says Crumbl's trade dress and trademarks qualified for registration because they are unique — and none of the commonalities between the way the two companies sell cookies are unique to the two companies. To support this claim, it noted Crumbl's lawsuit against Crave Cookies.
The counterclaim states Crumbl requires lease terms keeping other cookie companies out of similar spaces and has a monetary interest in preventing competition.
Dirty Dough said the more than six-month delay in filing its countersuit is "short compared to the life of the case." The motion was submitted to the court on Thursday, and Crumbl has not issued a response.
The case is set for a miscellaneous hearing on April 24; two additional hearings are set for April 26 and May 4, for attorneys to dispute a motion from Crumbl asking for a preliminary injunction — a court order requiring Dirty Dough to stop using marketing, recipes and logos it claims are too similar or identical to Crumbl's trademarks while the case is pending.
Initially, Dirty Dough seemed to embrace the lawsuit in its marketing campaign with billboards highlighting it. One said "Cookies so good we're being sued!" while another said, "We don't file lawsuits, we just have better cookies!"
The company's website now says it has 15 open locations, with 40 more on the way.
Near the end of 2022, Dirty Dough founder Bennett Maxwell told KSL that the company had an increase in sales after the lawsuit, calling it "the best thing that could have happened to us."
That recipe for success, though, may have changed, as the lawsuit continues and the company faces new financial challenges — for which it blames the lawsuit.
