This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In early 2021, the EPA issued a Stop Sale, Use or Removal Order to defendant Via Clean ordering it stop marketing the product with claims that it was effective against public health-related pathogens, including coronavirus. the Lanham Act falseadvertising claim survived. Comment: This is a proximate cause question.
2021 WL 5810487, NO. 7, 2021) It’s very interesting to me that, even as the TMA made injunctive relief much easier to get in Lanham Act cases, courts also seem to be presuming that disgorgement of profits is a standard remedy. Watkins Inc. McCormick & Co., 15-2688(DSD/BRT) (D. Edriver Inc., 3d 820 (9th Cir.
2021 WL 4170997, No. 14, 2021) Dawgs alleged that Crocs falsely marketed its shoes in violation of the Lanham Act by advertising Croslite, the foam material that Crocs shoes are made from, as “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive.” Crocs, Inc. Effervescent, Inc., 06-cv-00605-PAB-KMT, No. 16-cv-02004-PAB-KMT (D.
2021 WL 4226197, No. 28, 2021) Mostly this case is about other things, but the court finds a duty to defend in the underlying falseadvertising case. Luxottica was sued in a class action alleging that its AccuFit system for prescription eyeglasses was falselyadvertised as more accurate. 1:20-cv-698 (S.D.
Carrier & Rebecca Tushnet, An Antitrust Framework for FalseAdvertising , 106 Iowa L. 1841 (2021) From the introduction: Federal law presumes that falseadvertising harms competition. Federal law also presumes that falseadvertising is harmless or even helpful to competition.
Copper Compression Brands LLC, 2021 WL 5013799, No. 27, 2021) Ideavillage sued CCB for trademark infringement and false designation of origin related to Ideavillage’s “Copper Fit” line of copper-infused compression garments. Here, the court granted leave to amend to add a falseadvertising claim.
Amazon.com, 2021 WL 4819602, No. 20-01628, 2021 WL 1549667, at *2 (E.D. 20, 2021).” [No That’s kind of the point of falseadvertising law generally, and certainly the “Made in the USA” cases make clear that deviation from what you were promised as part of the bargain is a potential cause of economic loss.
ZimVie intervened and counterclaimed for declaratory judgment of invalidity, cancellation fo the color marks registration, declaratory judgment of noninfringement, falseadvertising under the Lanham Act and California law, and tortious interference.
C21-312 TSZ, 2021 WL 3930694 (W.D. 2, 2021) Rex sued Zillow and the National Association of Realtors for antitrust and falseadvertising violations. Surprisingly, the antitrust claims survive, as do falseadvertising claims agains Zillow. 2:21-cv-00012, 2021 WL 3680717 (D. Zillow Inc., Zillow, Inc.,
Vining, 2021 WL 4344891, No. Falseadvertising: This one survived: By listing LStar developments under the heading “Oak City Representative Developments,” “the proposal necessarily implies that defendant Oak City developed those properties.” LStar Development Gp., 5:20-CV-184-FL (E.D.N.C. What about injury? “[H]ere
2021 WL 4460806, No. 29, 2021) The Clorox defendants sell dietary supplements using the raw materials provided by Certified’s competitor, Avicenna. 18-cv-0744 W (KSC) (S.D. As a reminder, §1117(a) specifically also says “a violation under section 1125(a)” immediately after the quoted words.
2021 WL 4622504, No. 7, 2021) Quidel appealed the grant of summary judgment to Siemens on Quidel’s Lanham Act falseadvertising claims and related state claims. Quidel alleged that Siemens advertised (1) but provided (2). Also, and weird to present it this way, Siemens didn’t engage in falseadvertising to doctors.
19-62225-CIV-ALTMAN, 2021 WL 810279 (S.D. 3, 2021) Sometimes I worry that judicial writing is tending too much towards the flip as it moves away from prolixity, but this is a lovely example of how clear language can be deployed: If you want to build with plywood in the United States, you generally need a certification— called a PS 1-09 stamp.
2021) You probably know that the court of appeals sent this case back for retrial on an initial interest confusion theory. I won’t say much about that, though I do have a big question, but there are also falseadvertising aspects of the case. Select Comfort Corp. Baxter; 996 F.3d 3d 925 (8 th Cir.
2021 WL 1650266, No. 27, 2021) It Works is a MLM company that sells health and beauty products that requires distributors to sign a noncompete agreement and provides for arbitration (which allows “any party” to sue in court for IP claims, practically meaning that It Works can choose to sue if it wants). It Works Marketing, Inc.
United States, 2021 WL 5371406, No. 18, 2021) I can’t improve upon the court’s excellent summary and won’t try, instead joining in the call for FTC/AGs etc. That the producer defrauded consumers is of no moment for antidumping purposes, as the Department lacks jurisdiction to police falseadvertising violations.
2021 WL 2453394, No. 16, 2021) Along with breach of contract and tortious interference claims, Energizer alleged that MTA falselyadvertised by selling batteries with Energizer’s mark and then by fulfilling orders with products different from those advertised and shipping batteries to consumers that were “used, aged, or tampered-with.”
Arbors at California Oaks Property Owner, LLC, 2021 WL 1264423, E073950, Cal.Rptr.3d Defendants argued that common questions didn’t predominate for falseadvertising. Statutory falseadvertising is not common law fraud. The court of appeals reversed.
PureThink, LLC, 2021 WL 2483778, No. May 18, 2021) Neo4j specializes in graph database management systems. Summary judgment granted on state and federal falseadvertising claims. False designation of origin: Yep. Neo4j, Inc. 5:18-cv-07182-EJD (N.D. I still don’t know what that means, but ok.]
Roach, 2021 WL 4134836, No. 1, 2021) Entrepreneur, a frequent trademark claimant, sought to amend its complaint and add new parties to the TM claims here. Entrepreneur’s desire to bring forth a claim for falseadvertising against a competitor in a similar market is not unusual behavior.” Entrepreneur Media, Inc.
CV 20-9482-DMG (ASx), 2021 WL 4134841 (C.D. 6, 2021) VFB sued MPL for Lanham Act, UCL, and FAL violations based on MPL’s “vampiro” cocktail. Unsurprisingly, the trademark claims survive a motion to dismiss, but associated falseadvertising claims don’t. Vampire Family Brands, LLC v. MPL Brands, Inc.,
2021 WL 765293, No. 26, 2021) The parties compete to sell protein powder to consumers. SI03 originally sued for falseadvertising and related claims, and Musclegen counterclaimed similarly. SI03, Inc. Musclegen Research, Inc., 1:16-CV-274 RLW (E.D.
4, 2023) McCracken alleged that SlimFast food products were falselyadvertised as “CLINICALLY PROVEN [ – ] LOSE WEIGHT & KEEP IT OFF” on the front of their packaging. McCracken v. KSF Acquisition Corp., 2023 WL 5667869, No. 5:22-cv-01666-SB-SHK (C.D. The case was later dismissed after an individual settlement.)
The Sports Mall LLC, 2021 WL 6804246, No. This alleged chutzpah triggered the falseadvertising element of the case. “[T]he Falseadvertising under the Lanham Act: The court identified two theories. (1) Falseadvertising under the Lanham Act: The court identified two theories. (1) Kevorkian v.
3d -, 2021 WL 2433944, No. 15, 2021) Logistick sells disposable load bars which are used to secure cargo freight during transport. AB allegedly began advertising for a similar product, claiming that its load bars have “30% more Holding Power than similar Disposable Load Bars,” allegedly an admitted reference to Logistick.
The suit also included a claim of falseadvertising after Online2LiveStream transformed itself into a scam site, offering events in exchange for credit card details but failing to deliver. On September 17, the court issued a minute order directing Triller to file either a proof of service or a status report by December 17, 2021.
3d -, 2021 WL 790638 (S.D.N.Y. 26, 2021) These are two putative class actions against Columbia and Pace based on allegedly broken promises due to the pandemic. In re Columbia Tuition Refund Action, No. 20-CV-3208 (JMF) & 20-CV-3210 (JMF), F.Supp.3d
Holsinger, 2021 WL 3617153, No. 16, 2021) Roof Maxx distributes “a soy-based liquid product that is sprayed on asphalt shingle roofs to extend the life of the shingles.” Shingle Savers counterclaimed, alleging, among other things, falseadvertising under the Lanham Act and violation of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
2021 WL 1215869, No. 31, 2021) Plaintiffs alleged that Safelite misrepresented the nature and characteristics of plaintiffs’ products to consumers in violation of the Lanham Act. Campfield v. Safelite Gp., 2:15-cv-2733 (S.D. Safelite counterclaimed for various business torts/CFAA violations. can be safe and is viable.”
May 7, 2021), the Court granted Natera’s motion to exclude at trial the opinions of CareDx’s damages expert relating to “corrective advertising damages.” CareDx’s Lanham Act claims were based on allegations that Natera falsely represented that Natera’s Prospera kidney transplant test is superior to CareDx’s Allosure Kidney test.
2021 WL 5758889, No. 3, 2021) Stout sued Grubhub over an allegedly false promise to provide “Unlimited Free Delivery” to Grubhub+ subscribers. The paradigmatic example of public injunctive relief is an injunction against falseadvertising aimed at the general public. Grubhub Inc., 21-cv-04745-EMC (N.D.
City of Pasadena, 2021 WL 3553499, No. 12, 2021) For over a century, PTRA has hosted the Rose Parade and Rose Bowl Game as part of its annual New Year’s Day Celebration. This also got rid of the breach of contract claim, which was based on the alleged trademark infringement and falseadvertising.
Smash My Trash, LLC, 2021 WL 3354839, No. 2, 2021) Allied, aka Republic, “provides waste and recycling services to business and residential customers in the Kansas City metropolitan area.” Republic alleged tortious interference, trespass/conversion, and falseadvertising claims. Allied Servs., 21-cv-00249-SRB (W.D.
20-16138, Fed.Appx. -, 2021 WL 963782 (9 th Cir. 15, 2021) ThermoLife got a significant success in this appeal of the dismissal of its false patent marking, falseadvertising, and unfair competition claims. Thermolife Int’l, LLC v. Compound Solutions, Inc., Was TL allowed to sue under Lexmark ?
2021 WL 1580827, No. 22, 2021) I find the vanilla class actions fascinating because they are starting to reject surveys, pushing this area of the law towards a normative vision of what’s misleading to a reasonable consumer. Westbrae Natural, Inc., 20-cv-03221-JSC (N.D.
2021 WL 930453, No. 11, 2021) Previous opinion. This was allegedly still false and misleading, and First Databank allegedly falselyadvertised that it “compile[s]” the relevant information in its database and for its coding determinations from the FDA and from manufacturers, such as Alfasigma. Alfasigma USA, Inc.
Pandora Marketing, LLC, 2021 WL 1573073, CV 20-5486 DSF (ADSx) (C.D. 12, 2021) Another timeshare company v. Regardless of which standard applied, Diamond successfully alleged contributory falseadvertising. Diamond Resorts U.S. Collection Development, LLC v. timeshare exit company case.
Clean & Sober Media, LLC, 2021 WL 3702243, No. Is that true for falseadvertising plaintiffs? A jury found defendants liable for falseadvertising through a purportedly unbiased, independent site. Grasshopper House, LLC v. 19-56008, No. 19-56072, Fed.Appx. - (9 th Cir.
2021 WL 1893074, No. May 11, 2021) Facebook’s application of “Russia state-controlled media” label to a news page on Facebook was not commercial advertising or promotion. Mentioned here mostly to highlight the differences in pleading standards applied to trademark and falseadvertising claims. Maffick LLC v.
1125(a)(1) for misrepresentation of sponsorship (FalseAdvertising + False Association). 2021), cert. 22, 2021). In Gibson , the plaintiffs have sued under both the Lanham Act and N.C. state law: Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. common law right of privacy – misappropriation. Defamation. 2d 352 (Nov.
I’m only going to discuss the false association/falseadvertising bits; as to the latter, state law provides more protection than federal because of the “commercial advertising or promotion” requirement for Lanham Act falseadvertising. The false association/coordinate state law claims survived.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content