article thumbnail

plaintiff has standing to seek injunctive relief against allegedly falsely advertised penile implant

43(B)log

2:22-cv-03391-SSS-PLAx, 2023 WL 5667568 (C.D. 17, 2023) Plaintiff brought the usual California statutory claims against Penuma, a penile implant/procedure, for alleged misstatements about Penuma’s safety and efficacy. International Medical Devices, Inc., Here, we deal only with the claims for injunctive relief.

article thumbnail

False Advertising: Verifiably False Versus Subjective Opinion

JD Supra Law

In a case originally based on a false advertising claim under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded the district court’s dismissal of the claim. June 2, 2023) (Clifton, Bumatay, By: McDermott Will & Emery Enigma Software Group USA, LLC v.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

False advertising and TM infringement receive very different damages treatment: case in point

43(B)log

19-662-CFC, 2023 WL 4561059 (D. 17, 2023) Another entry in the “courts treat Lanham Act false advertising very differently than Lanham Act trademark infringement, despite identical damages provisions” line. CareDx sued Natera for false advertising. Natera, Inc., It also found that CareDx was entitled to $21.2

article thumbnail

alleged misrepresentation of partnership/approval suffices for false advertising claim

43(B)log

2023 WL 8586681, No. 8, 2023) When does TM logic creep into false advertising cases? The allegation that hundreds of brands have been targeted by Tundra’s false advertising “supports an inference Tundra’s misrepresentations have the tendency to deceive a substantial segment of Faire’s audience.”

article thumbnail

court remands NYC's false advertising case against oil companies to state court

43(B)log

Here, the city successfully wins remand (and a fee award) in this opinion rejecting removal of its false advertising suit against Exxon, other fossil fuel companies, and their top trade association for violations of New York City’s Consumer Protection Law. 2023), the court understandably refuses to distinguish it.

article thumbnail

Another API (c) case with false advertising and contract claims too

43(B)log

Defendants allegedly copied key components of Trackman’s copyrighted software and falsely suggested, in promotions and advertisements, that defendants were authorized to use the well-known courses in their game. Although the court dismissed a contract claim, copyright and false advertising claims survived.

article thumbnail

Cy pres recipient in false advertising case has to be false-advertising-focused group, court rules

43(B)log

2023 WL 8811499, No. 20, 2023) The court denies settlement approval in this case alleging that Macy’s misrepresented the thread count in some of the sheets it sold, because it doesn’t like the cy pres part of the remedy. You might think that class action rules can be a bit like Calvinball, and I'd be hard pressed to disagree.