Draeger Oil Co., Inc. v. Uno-Ven Co., No. 99-C-317 (E.D. Wis. 3-27-02)

Uno-Ven held an exclusive license to market petroleum under the 76-brand in the Midwest, operating as a partnership between an affiliate of Unocal and an affiliate of Citgo. When the partnership ended, Uno-Ven's license to use the 76-brand was terminated and certain refining and marketing assets transferred to another affiliate of Citgo. As a result of the restructuring, Uno-Ven notified its franchisees that their franchises would be terminated under § 2802(b)(2)(C) and § 2802(c)(6). The Franchisees filed suit, seeking damages for alleged improper termination under the PMPA. The court granted franchisor's motion for summary judgment holding termination was proper as the restructuring was a reasonable basis for termination - market withdrawal was an analogous event even though it did not fall squarely within the statutorily enumerated "relevant" events. Further, loss of the right to grant use of the 76-brand trademark constituted and independent ground for termination.