Delta Faces Allegations of Concealing Evidence in Alaska Airlines Trademark Case

Lawsuit Overview: Alaska Airlines vs. Delta

LONDON- Delta Air Lines is facing allegations from Alaska Airlines regarding their trademark lawsuit against Virgin Group in the UK. The center of this dispute pertains to Alaska’s claim that Virgin Atlantic facilitated infringing actions related to Delta-operated flights in the U.S.

The subpoena involves sales associated with Virgin Atlantic’s platform, which allowed loyalty members to use their points for Delta-run services within airports in the U.S., such as Seattle (SEA) and Atlanta (ATL). Alaska Airlines argues these activities violated its exclusive rights linked to the earlier Virgin America brand.

Alaska Airlines Claims Delta is Withholding Evidence

Recently, Alaska Airlines received U.S. court approval to gather evidence from Delta for its ongoing litigation in the UK. This request follows Alaska’s discovery that Virgin Atlantic had been promoting and selling Delta’s domestic flights under the Virgin branding, which Alaska argues violates its trademark rights.

Although Delta is not officially part of the UK case, Alaska contends that it possesses crucial records regarding the inception of the alleged infringement, its extent, and financial implications. Alaska believes that Delta benefitted from this conduct and is directly aware of the situation.

Delta has opposed the subpoena, labeling Alaska’s requests as overly expansive. However, Alaska insists that the documents and testimonies sought are specifically related to Virgin Atlantic’s loyalty program activities and how those may have funneled customers into Delta’s services.

Origins of the Dispute

The conflict can be traced back to Alaska’s acquisition of Virgin America in 2016, which included a trademark license granting Alaska exclusive rights to use the Virgin brand for domestic U.S. flights.

After retiring the Virgin America brand in 2019, Alaska ceased royalty payments under a clause permitting suspension if trademarks were no longer in use. However, Virgin Group contested Alaska’s stance and filed suit in the UK, resulting in court rulings that Alaska still owed minimum royalties due to the exclusive rights’ value.

During these proceedings, Alaska discovered that Virgin Atlantic had been advertising Delta-operated flights under the Virgin brand via its Flying Club program, which Alaska claims undermined the exclusivity it was financially supporting. This prompted Alaska to file a separate UK breach claim, asserting Virgin’s violation terminated their trademark license and damages are owed.

Delta’s Role in Virgin Atlantic’s Loyalty Program

Members of the Flying Club were allowed to redeem points earned through partner airlines and credit cards for Delta-operated domestic flights. Alaska claims this setup diverted customer loyalty and revenue toward Delta, consequently benefiting both Virgin and Delta at the expense of Alaska’s contractually protected interests in the U.S. market.

Alaska also highlights its competitive history with Delta, particularly how their partnership ended shortly after Alaska’s merger with Virgin America, followed by Delta’s aggressive expansion in Seattle.

The Legal Process and Timeline

In July 2025, Alaska filed a Section 1782 application seeking discovery from Delta for its UK case, which the U.S. court approved by October 2025.

Alaska served Delta with a subpoena that requires detailed testimony and documentation regarding the financial impact of the Flying Club sales and any coordination between Virgin Atlantic and Delta.

In December 2025, Delta objected to the subpoena, seeking permission from the court to quash it. A resolution may arise from this joint filing or proceed through full briefing and a hearing.

Status of the UK Litigation

The UK breach litigation remains active, with Alaska claiming Virgin’s actions ended the trademark license, thus eliminating any obligation for further royalties.

Alaska seeks damages to recover or offset previous royalty payments. If Delta eventually produces the requested evidence, it could influence the UK court’s evaluation of the infringement’s extent and impact.