Remove 2017 Remove False Advertising Remove Litigation
article thumbnail

False patent marking claims survive even when Dastar bars false advertising claims based on "innovation"

43(B)log

30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash technology, but false patent marking counterclaims should survive. 1, 2017 to Apr. 11, 2023 (claiming that various products were “patented”).

article thumbnail

False advertising-based antitrust claims against Facebook survive motion to dismiss

43(B)log

14, 2022) Once in a blue moon, a false advertising-based antitrust claim survives a motion to dismiss in a circuit that imposes a list of excessive requirements on such claims. Consumers and advertisers adequately alleged that Facebook has monopoly power in social network/social media (consumers) and social advertising markets.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

patent misrepresentations to prospective dealer could be false advertising under Dastar/Lexmark

43(B)log

Shingle Savers counterclaimed, alleging, among other things, false advertising under the Lanham Act and violation of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Lanham Act/ODTPA claims: First, the court declined to hold that Rule 9(b) applied to Lanham Act false advertising claims, which don’t require fraud.

article thumbnail

TIL: “Texas Tamale” Is an Enforceable Trademark–Texas Tamale v. CPUSA2

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

In 2020, the plaintiff learned that “Defendant was using Plaintiff’s Marks in online tamale advertisements and in Google AdWords, which placed Defendant’s products above Plaintiff’s products in search results for the phrase ‘Texas Tamale.'” ” That prompted this litigation. ” Uh oh. See Tempur-Pedic N.

Trademark 129
article thumbnail

Vivian Cheng Named 2021 “Rising Star” by Managing Intellectual Property

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

Cheng is based in Fish’s New York office, where she focuses her practice on trademark, trade dress, unfair competition, and copyright litigation. MIP ’s independent research is based on a weighted system of peer and client feedback, combined with a review of information obtained from surveys conducted with law firms and their clients.

article thumbnail

political speech isn't covered by Lanham Act but is protected by Cal anti-SLAPP law

43(B)log

They alleged violation of California’s FAL and UCL, false advertising under the Lanham Act, trade libel, and negligence. The complaint was filed mid-2021, and the injuries allegedly began in mid-2017, which was outside the statute of limitations for everything but the UCL.

Law 59
article thumbnail

marketing may be material even to very expensive/complex business purchases

43(B)log

30, 2022) Pegasystems alleged that defendants, which compete with it in the business process management (BPM) software field, engaged in false advertising and commercial disparagement in an online report that portrayed Pegasystems unfavorably. 19-11461-PBS, 2022 WL 4630231, F.Supp.3d Previous discussion.) Chapter 93A).