2006 Advertising False Advertising 
Patently-O
APRIL 17, 2024
by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit is set to consider the use of terms like “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive” in commercial advertising can be actionable under § 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act when their use is not entirely accurate. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions.
43(B)log
OCTOBER 12, 2021
7, 2021) Quidel appealed the grant of summary judgment to Siemens on Quidel’s Lanham Act false advertising claims and related state claims. Quidel alleged that Siemens advertised (1) but provided (2). And there was no triable issue on actual injury based on allegedly false advertising to the physicians.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
43(B)log
JUNE 30, 2022
28, 2022) The parties compete to provide online ordinations to individuals who wish to perform marriage ceremonies and accuse each other of misconduct in advertising. ULC Monastery was founded by George Freeman in 2006. Lexmark , the court held, didn’t supersede the presumption of injury for false comparative advertising.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
JUNE 8, 2024
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. The court said that the trademark owner had been using the trademark since 1985 and registered the trademark in 2006. ” Say what? ” That prompted this litigation. ” UGH.
43(B)log
MARCH 14, 2024
11, 2024) I have a long-running interest in Rule 68 offers of judgment, and this case involves an interaction with false advertising law! In 2006, Crocs sued now-plaintiff Double Diamond and Dawgs, its affiliate. Crocs, Inc., 2024 WL 1051951No. 23-cv-01790-PAB-KAS (D. The parties compete in the shoe market.
43(B)log
AUGUST 18, 2021
were valid and infringed, but the latter wasn’t counterfeited; SMRI’s dilution victory was vacated, but not its victories on deceptive trade practices, ACPA, false advertising, and unfair competition. SMRI ultimately sent one C&D in August 2006, and filed suit in June 2011. Here the court considers acquiescence and laches.
LexBlog IP
MARCH 17, 2024
Here, Crocs sued defendants in 2006. Defendant Diamond Distribution then sued Crocs for defamation, false advertising, and related state torts. The holding, at 12(b)(6); The Court finds that the complaint plausibly establishes that the press release contains materially false statements. Crocs moved to dismiss.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
115 
Let's personalize your content