Preliminary Injunction Granted Where Competitor Posed as Plaintiff to Poach Customers

Endurance Warranty Services, LLC v. Nationwide AutoProtect, LLC, No. 26 C 3622, (N.D. Ill. June 7, 2026) (Kennelly, J.).

Judge Kennelly granted plaintiff Endurance Warranty Services’ motion for a preliminary injunction (PI) in this Lanham Act case alleging that direct competitor Nationwide AutoProtect posed as Endurance via deceptive websites and telephone calls and directly contacted Endurance customers with false accusations to induce them to cancel their Endurance contracts and switch to Nationwide. The Court held an expedited PI hearing at which Endurance presented testimony and exhibits. Nationwide called no witnesses.

Of particular interest, the Court held:

• False Advertising: Endurance introduced evidence of numerous customer reports of calls in which callers, reasonably inferred to be acting for Nationwide, since they tried to switch customers to Nationwide, falsely claimed Endurance was going out of business, had been “red flagged” by the government, was under DOJ investigation, or was a fraudulent business not paying claims. Call transcripts showed material deception on matters significant to a reasonable customer’s contract decision. The interstate telephone calls established the interstate-commerce nexus.
• Trademark Infringement: Endurance submitted evidence of a Google banner ad appearing in searches for “Endurance” that identified Nationwide as “Endurance Car Warranty” and routed customers seeking Endurance’s customer service to Nationwide instead. The Court found this was sufficient evidence of likelihood of confusion and misappropriation of Endurance’s goodwill. Nationwide did not contest the validity of Endurance’s mark at this stage.
• Irreparable Harm: The Court found it reasonable to infer that customers who did not personally contact Endurance about the misleading calls simply canceled their contracts. Both the deceptive calls and the false search ad created a significant, hard-to-quantify risk of goodwill impairment not compensable by money damages alone.
• Balance of Harms and Public Interest: The balance favored Endurance. Nationwide did not even argue the balance of harms tipped against an injunction. The Lanham Act reflects a public policy favoring enforcement of valid trademarks and preventing deceptive advertising.

The Court directed Endurance to submit a draft injunction order.