District-court result
Van Leeuwen won
The court found Rebel liable for federal and New York trade-dress infringement and related claims.
Last verified August 17, 2026 · U.S. federal court records
Rebel Creamery lawsuit: what happened, what the $23.785M ruling means, and what Chapter 11 changes
Current status: a federal district judge ruled for Van Leeuwen on July 16, Rebel filed a notice of appeal on August 12, and Rebel filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on August 14. Chapter 11 is a reorganization process, not an automatic announcement that a business is closing.
Independent informational website. Not affiliated with Rebel Creamery, Van Leeuwen, or either court. This is not legal advice.
01
Fast answer
What is confirmed right now?
Money judgment
$23.785 million
The award is disgorgement of profits, after the court applied a 33% equitable reduction.
Appeal
Notice filed
Rebel filed a notice of appeal on August 12, so the district-court judgment is being challenged.
Bankruptcy case
Chapter 11 filed
Rebel filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition in Utah on August 14.
Primary record: E.D.N.Y. Memorandum & Order, Doc. 125 · Appeal docket: district-court docket · Bankruptcy docket: Utah Ch. 11 docket
02
The question shoppers are asking
Is Rebel Creamery shutting down?
There is not enough verified information to say Rebel is permanently shutting down.
Chapter 11 usually provides a framework for a business to reorganize while continuing operations, although outcomes can include reorganization, sale, dismissal, conversion, or liquidation depending on what happens in the case. The filing itself is not a closure notice.
Rebel's own website is still online as of this verification date. Its pint listings currently say “Sales Paused — ETA 3–4 Weeks”. That storefront message is evidence of a temporary sales pause, not proof of the company's long-term outcome.
Known: Chapter 11 filed August 14. Unknown: the final reorganization plan, long-term retail availability, and final treatment of Van Leeuwen's disputed judgment claim.
Background: U.S. Courts — Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Basics · Store status: Rebel Creamery pints
03
Evidence boundary
Confirmed vs. still unresolved
Confirmed
- The district court found intentional infringement and dilution.
- The court ordered a packaging redesign and enjoined confusingly similar trade dress.
- The court awarded Van Leeuwen $23,785,000 of Rebel's profits.
- Rebel filed a notice of appeal on August 12.
- Rebel filed Chapter 11 in Utah on August 14.
Not established yet
- Whether the appeal will change or reverse the judgment.
- How the bankruptcy court will ultimately treat the Van Leeuwen claim.
- Whether Rebel will keep its current ownership or operating footprint.
- When online sales will resume or which retailers will have stock.
- Whether the lawsuit alone caused the Chapter 11 filing.
Important: timing does not prove causation. The Chapter 11 filing came less than a month after the judgment, and Van Leeuwen is listed as an unsecured creditor with a disputed $23.785 million claim under appeal; those facts do not establish that the judgment was the sole cause of the bankruptcy filing.
04
What the case was actually about
Why did Van Leeuwen win the lawsuit?
This was a trade-dress case: a dispute over the overall visual presentation of product packaging, not ownership of “pastel colors” in isolation.
Van Leeuwen identified a four-part combination: monochromatic cardboard pints with matching lids; a primarily pastel palette; black script with an exaggerated capital letter plus black descriptive text; and an overall minimalist aesthetic.
After a bench trial, Judge Eric Komitee found the trade dress protectable and concluded that the relevant likelihood-of-confusion factors strongly favored Van Leeuwen. The order also found bad faith and rejected Rebel's good-faith remote-user defense.
What does “trade dress” mean here?
In this case, the court analyzed the overall combination and commercial impression of the pint packaging. The decision did not say that any company owns pastel color, cursive type, or minimalism by itself.
The remedy
What did the court order Rebel to do?
- 01Stop selling confusingly similar trade dress.
The injunction targets products bearing trade dress likely to be confused with Van Leeuwen's.
- 02Redesign the packaging.
The order requires Rebel to avoid the Van Leeuwen trade-dress elements going forward.
- 03Disgorge $23.785 million in profits.
The court reached that figure after reducing the profits calculation by 33% on equitable grounds.
Because Rebel has appealed, these district-court rulings are being challenged. This page reports the judgment as entered; it does not predict the appellate result.
05
Case timeline
From packaging redesign to bankruptcy filing
Van Leeuwen begins rolling out the disputed trade dress
The court says all original dairy pints displayed the new look by 2017.
Rebel Creamery is founded
The court record says Austin and Courtney Archibald founded Rebel in Utah.
Rebel's pints enter the market
The litigation later centers on similarities between the two brands' pint packaging.
Van Leeuwen sues Rebel
Case 1:21-cv-02356 is filed in the Eastern District of New York.
Jury demand is struck
With only equitable remedies remaining, the case proceeds toward a bench trial rather than a jury trial.
Van Leeuwen wins after bench trial
The court finds intentional infringement and dilution, orders a redesign, enjoins confusingly similar packaging, and awards $23.785 million in profits.
Rebel files a notice of appeal
The district docket records an appeal from the judgment.
Rebel files Chapter 11
Rebel files case 2:26-bk-25006 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah.
06
What the new filing changes
Chapter 11, in plain English
It is
A court-supervised reorganization process
A Chapter 11 debtor usually remains in possession and may continue operating while proposing a plan for dealing with debts.
It is not
Automatic proof of permanent closure
Chapter 11 differs from a straightforward Chapter 7 liquidation. The eventual outcome depends on the case.
For this case
Van Leeuwen is a creditor
Current bankruptcy reporting lists Van Leeuwen's $23.785 million judgment as a disputed unsecured claim under appeal.
Bankruptcy can affect litigation and collection rights in ways that depend on specific court orders and bankruptcy law. This site does not give legal advice about the automatic stay or predict how the appeal and bankruptcy proceedings will interact.
General process: U.S. Courts · Case filing: 2:26-bk-25006 docket
07
Avoid a common mix-up
There is also a separate 2022 Rebel Creamery lawsuit
The 2026 Van Leeuwen case is a packaging/trade-dress dispute between two ice-cream companies. It is not the same case as Davis et al. v. Rebel Creamery LLC, filed in California in 2022.
In the 2022 case, consumers alleged that Rebel's “healthy” and “low carb” labeling and marketing were misleading. A March 2023 order granted Rebel's motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part, allowing some labeling-based theories to continue while dismissing claims based on online advertising as then pleaded.
Status boundary: this site's research verified that 2023 order, but did not find a sufficiently authoritative current source establishing the ultimate disposition of that separate case. It is included here only to help searchers distinguish the two lawsuits.
Record: March 23, 2023 order · Complaint: July 13, 2022 complaint
08
What matters next
Four developments to watch
01
Appeal docket
Whether the appellate court changes, affirms, or otherwise alters the district-court judgment.
02
Bankruptcy filings
Plans, creditor treatment, financing, sale proposals, or other orders that clarify the company's path.
03
Packaging changes
How Rebel responds to the injunction and redesign requirement while the judgment is challenged.
04
Product availability
Whether the current online sales pause ends and retail availability changes.
How this brief is built
Court records first. News and community signals second.
For legal conclusions, this page uses the court's July 16 Memorandum & Order as the primary source. Docket records are used for the notice of appeal and bankruptcy filing. U.S. Courts guidance is used for general Chapter 11 explanation.
Major reporting is used as corroboration and for developments not yet reflected in easily accessible primary records. Community discussions were used to identify questions people are asking — such as whether Rebel is disappearing from stores — but rumors are not treated as facts.
Update policy: the “Last verified” date changes only when the factual review is actually repeated and this page is materially updated. Corrections should replace the inaccurate statement, not merely append a new date.
Want to verify it yourself?
Read the underlying records
The public court order is the best place to check what the judge actually decided.