What the Hatch Name Is Worth — and Why Someone Fought to Take It
The Hatch Valley of New Mexico is a narrow stretch of irrigated land along the Rio Grande, roughly thirty miles long. Its combination of altitude, desert heat, cool nights, and volcanic soil produces a chile with a flavor profile that cannot be replicated elsewhere. Growers here have cultivated that reputation for generations.
That reputation also has commercial value — which is why the name "Hatch" became a target. A Georgia-based company called Hatch Chile Company registered a stylized "HATCH" trademark for its canned chile products in 1987, despite the fact that its chile was not grown in New Mexico's Hatch Valley. For years, the mark allowed the company to market products under a name that consumers associate with a specific geographic origin it could not credibly claim.
The Hatch Chile Association exists to protect Hatch Valley growers and the integrity of the Hatch name. Beginning in 2013, the Association — alongside El Encanto, Inc. (d/b/a Bueno Foods), a New Mexico processor — undertook a years-long legal effort to challenge the mark and establish the Association's own certification mark: the legal mechanism that would give Hatch growers an enforceable right to the name on their own products.
A Decade of Proceedings
The dispute moved through multiple venues — the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), the federal circuit courts, and ultimately the New Mexico state courts. The timeline below traces the major milestones.
Hatch Chile Company founded; "HATCH" trademark registered
The Georgia-based Hatch Chile Company is founded and registers a stylized "HATCH" mark for its canned chile products — despite not sourcing its chile from the Hatch Valley of New Mexico.
TTAB cancellation filed (No. 92056871)
El Encanto, Inc. (d/b/a Bueno Foods) and the Hatch Chile Association jointly file a cancellation petition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, challenging Hatch Chile Company's "HATCH" registration.
Hatch Chile Company counters with TTAB opposition (No. 91223190)
Hatch Chile Company files a TTAB opposition against the Association's application for the "HATCH" certification mark, seeking to block the Association from protecting the name.
10th Circuit rules in favor of growers
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit rules in favor of the growers, allowing discovery into whether Hatch Chile Company's products actually contain chile grown in the Hatch Valley.
Settlement agreement reached
The parties reach a settlement. Hatch Chile Company agrees not to oppose the Association's certification mark for unprocessed chile and agrees to pay the Association $40 per ton on green chile used in its products.
Association sues to enforce the settlement (D-307-CV-2017-03793)
When Hatch Chile Company fails to honor the settlement — no joint statement is issued and no royalties are paid — the Association files suit in the Third Judicial District Court for Doña Ana County, New Mexico, seeking specific performance and damages for breach of contract.
"HINT OF HATCH" mark opposed (TTAB No. 87863410)
The Association and El Encanto oppose Flagship Food Group's "HINT OF HATCH" trademark application before the TTAB, continuing efforts to protect the Hatch name.
Amended complaint filed
The Association files a verified amended complaint, adding claims including malicious abuse of process and prima facie tort alongside the specific-performance and breach-of-contract claims.
Jury trial in Doña Ana County
After years of pretrial proceedings, the case is tried to a jury before Judge Manuel I. Arrieta in the Third Judicial District Court.
Judgment entered for the Association
The court enters judgment for the Association on the special verdict, granting equitable relief that enforces the 2017 settlement terms in case D-307-CV-2017-03793.
Hatch Chile Company appeals (A-1-CA-42892)
Hatch Chile Company files a notice of appeal and later posts a $553,000 supersedeas bond to stay enforcement. The appeal is docketed in the New Mexico Court of Appeals as A-1-CA-42892.
Appeal referred to mediation
After the appellants file their brief in chief, the New Mexico Court of Appeals refers the case to mediation and stays the briefing schedule for 90 days. The appeal is currently in mediation.
What the Settlement Required
The September 2017 settlement was a significant step for Hatch Valley growers. Under its terms, Hatch Chile Company agreed to two concrete obligations: it would not oppose the Association's certification mark for unprocessed Hatch chile, and it would pay the Association $40 per ton on green chile used in its products. Those royalties were intended to flow back to the Association and, through it, to the growers who make the Hatch name worth protecting.
Hatch Chile Company did not honor those terms. No joint statement was issued. No royalties were paid. The Association had no choice but to sue for specific performance — asking a court to compel the company to do what it had contractually agreed to do.
The District Court Win
The case was tried to a jury in the Third Judicial District Court for Doña Ana County in April 2025. On July 28, 2025, the court entered judgment for the Association on the special verdict in case D-307-CV-2017-03793 — including equitable relief that enforces the 2017 settlement. The judgment affirmed that the agreement was valid and enforceable and that the Association was entitled to the terms it had negotiated. The settlement terms are part of the public court record because the specific-performance action placed them there.
Hatch Chile Company appealed that judgment on August 6, 2025, posting a $553,000 supersedeas bond to stay enforcement during the appeal. The appeal is docketed as A-1-CA-42892 in the New Mexico Court of Appeals; in April 2026, the court referred the case to mediation and stayed briefing, so the matter is currently in mediation.
Why It Matters for Growers
A name like "Hatch" only holds value if it means something. When consumers see "Hatch" on a label, they expect chile that was actually grown in the Hatch Valley — by the families who have farmed there for generations. If any company can use the name on products grown anywhere, the name becomes meaningless and honest Hatch Valley growers lose the premium their land, labor, and heritage have earned.
The Association's certification mark — won through this litigation — is the legal instrument that prevents that outcome. It gives the Association the authority to license the Hatch name to verified growers and to challenge unauthorized use. The lawsuit is not an abstraction; it is about whether small Hatch Valley growers control the name they built.
Latest Updates
- Hatch Chile Company appeals; case referred to mediation
Hatch Chile Company appealed the judgment to the New Mexico Court of Appeals (A-1-CA-42892). In April 2026 the court referred the appeal to mediation and stayed briefing for 90 days.
- Court enters judgment for the Association after jury trial
After an April 2025 jury trial, the Third Judicial District Court entered judgment for the Hatch Chile Association in its specific-performance suit (D-307-CV-2017-03793), including equitable relief enforcing the 2017 settlement.