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
Skillz sued its competitor Papaya, alleging falseadvertising under federal and state law. That is, falseadvertising was sufficiently pled as to statements that games on Skillzs platforms did not use bots, matched players evenly, and allowed users to withdraw funds at any time. Skillz Platform Inc. Papaya Gaming, Ltd.,
In reliance, AHBP allegedly hired employees and designers, consulted with lawyers, accountants, biologists and virologists, rented warehouse and office space, and entered into contracts with buyers in Argentina. the Lanham Act falseadvertising claim survived. Comment: This is a proximate cause question.
17, 2023) Another entry in the “courts treat Lanham Act falseadvertising very differently than Lanham Act trademark infringement, despite identical damages provisions” line. CareDx sued Natera for falseadvertising. Natera, Inc., 19-662-CFC, 2023 WL 4561059 (D. Natera made superiority claims for its Prospera.
25, 2022) I know it probably seems sometimes like I approve of every expansive use of falseadvertising law, but sometimes even I find an aggressive position to go too far. The report concluded that the Italian formulation qualifies both as “GRAS” and as a “medical food” under US law, allegedly giving credence to these claims. [I
22, 2022) The court here allows an antitrust claim to proceed based in part on allegedly false/misleading statements because they form part of the alleged anticompetitive product-hopping scheme and because the unique characteristics of the drug market make market-based responses to falseadvertising difficult.
Plaintiffs allegd both direct and contributory falseadvertising, which requires (1) that the “third party in fact directly engaged in falseadvertising that injured the plaintiff” and (2) “that the defendant contributed to that conduct either by knowingly inducing, or causing the conduct, or by materially participating in it.”
pictures of not-good plywood from case Plaintiffs alleged both direct and contributory falseadvertising. Defendants challenged whether plaintiffs identified any false or misleading statements by defendants. In Baldino’s Lock & Key Serv., Google, Inc., App’x 81 (4th Cir.
They have sued rival restaurant chain Daryaganj for falsely taking credit for the creation of butter chicken. As reported , Monish Gujral, the managing director at Moti Mahal says “ You cannot take away somebody’s legacy … The dish was invented when our grandfather was in Pakistan.” News reports (of which there are several!
15, 2023) Simpson sued its competitor MiTek for using Simpson part numbers for structural connectors/fasteners for use in the construction industry in its catalogs/other promotional material; the court here, after a nonjury trial before the magistrate judge, rather comprehensively rejects its falseadvertising, trademark, and copyright claims. (It
21, 2023) Deetsch alleged that he owned design patents for CPAP pillow products, which the Lei defendants infringed. They also allegedly used Deetch’s image in ads and on packaging, and allegedly falsely claimed on Amazon that their pillow products “were designed in the United States but are manufactured in China.”
17, 2020) A lot of stuff here; I will ignore the non-falseadvertising related aspects of this mostly antitrust case. The court says the usual not-good things about falseadvertising’s relationship to antitrust, unfortunately: Deceptive speech usually doesn’t violate antitrust laws. 17-md-2785-DDC-TJJ (D.
were not designed to protect originality or creativity.” “Yet Yet that is precisely what Plaintiff seeks to protect in this case: the originality and novelty of its own cooler design.” July 25, 2014), report and recommendation adopted, No. Comment: “First printing” might therefore be different.) Blue Spike, LLC v.
1, 2024) NYU Langone sued Northwell for trade dress infringement, unfair competition and falsedesignation of origin, and falseadvertising under the Lanham Act, as well as related claims under the New York GBL and New York common law. The court dismissed the complaint—the falseadvertising claims with prejudice.
Elysium argued that the website as a whole was a referral website for Tru Niagen, which advertised Tru Niagen at the top of every page. There’s a difference between a statement about product benefits made by Consumer Reports and the same statement by a person with an economic motive who also displayed a banner, “Buy This Product.”
11, 2023) The parties compete in the design of buckling-restrained braces, which are structural devices that help buildings withstand seismic activity. The University issued a report concluding two of the five BRBs did not satisfy American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 341-10 requirements. SME Steel Contractors, Inc.
May 25, 2022) Alcon sued Lens.com for federal and state falseadvertising and trademark claims. 1994), “before considering consumer survey evidence, a district court must, first, determine whether the designation of geographic origin is ‘geographically descriptive.’ The Lanham Act falseadvertising counterclaim was dismissed.
24, 2022) This seems like a silly result to me, shifting the burden to comparative advertisers, but it's often much harder to get summary judgment in a trademark case than in comparable cases. PennEngineering claims a PEM family of marks and sued Peninsula for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, falseadvertising, and unfair competition.
PG&E asked Eco to design a “cutout cover” to prevent animals from coming into contact with “cutouts,” a type of electrical device that rests atop utility poles. The resulting ECC-3, which is designed for cutouts made out of porcelain, is Eco’s most successful product and is also sold to other utility companies.
2, 2022) Before the jury verdict in favor of Monster’s falseadvertising claim was this opinion resolving evidentiary issues. However, they fail to show that Monster dirtied its hands to make the falseadvertising claims now alleged against Defendants.” Monster Energy Co. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2022 WL 17218077, No.
9, 2023) Simpson sued MiTek for Lanham Act and state law falseadvertising/passing off, and for copyright infringement. Each product name has a “part name” (a letter or combination of letters designating the product line) and a “model number” (additional numbers and letters that distinguish parts with different attributes).
PNC sued for counterfeiting, infringement, and falseadvertising/unfair competition under federal and Pennsylvania law. A consumer complaint cited by PNC might be relevant to falseadvertising, but didn’t obviously show trademark confusion: Venmo says they have lost connection with my bank – sounds like Venmo’s problem.
Butler found that there was no statistically significant difference in cells’ self-reported likelihood of purchasing shoes on StockX, suggesting lack of materiality. First, Nike argued, materiality was irrelevant because literally false claims are conclusively presumed to be material.
Enigma sued its competitor Malwarebytes for Lanham Act falseadvertising and NY business torts for designating its products as “malicious,” “threats,” and “potentially unwanted programs” (PUPs). The district court dismissed the complaint on the grounds that these designations were “non-actionable statements of opinion.”
of respondents reported that they believed that “all of the vanilla flavor” comes from the vanilla plant; 16.6% Unilever’s criticisms boil down to a disagreement as to Dr. Dennis’ survey design choices, which go to the weight to be accorded to Dr. Dennis’ survey results and opinions when determining the merits of Vizcarra’s claims at trial.”
It contracts with Charities Aid Foundation of America, which in turn delivers donated funds to designated charities. For certain “celebrity experiences,” 60% of the money donated goes to CAFA to be paid to the designated charity, but for Omaze-owned campaigns, Omaze keeps 85%. Omaze now buys its own swag for contests.
Meredith alleged that Vacasa “has embarked on a smear campaign surgically targeted at [Plaintiff’s] homeowner customers, designed to unfairly snuff out that competition.” The court found that the alleged statements weren’t “commercial advertising” covered by the Lanham Act.
2024) The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of KIND on Bustamante’s falseadvertising consumer protection class action claims based on KIND’s “All Natural” labeling. Bustamante v. KIND, LLC, 100 F.4th 4th 419 (2d Cir. Without the expert evidence, summary judgment for KIND was appropriate.
It alleged that the Philips defendants, who make such devices, engaged in falseadvertising about one of SoClean’s devices in order to deflect blame for the Philips devices’ design defects. Commercial advertising or promotion: A separate problem. Recall notice: Eli Lilly & Co. Roussel Corp., 2d 460 (D.N.J.
9, 2021) Alleged ambiguity didn’t save AB from this falseadvertising claim. This was because “national” is also integral to the organic certification program, a main purpose of which was “to create a national, unified standard for organic labelling, designation, and advertising.” Suzie's Brewery Company v.
Defendants sell allegedly falselyadvertised Cosequin canine joint health supplements, which contain glucosamine and chondroitin as the main active ingredient. Defendants’ expert reports did not show that individual issues predominated on materiality. ED CV 19-0835 FMO (SPx), 2022 WL 1600047 (C.D.
Russell created four sculptural works: “Medusa,” “Polyp,” “Hydra,” and “Ophelia”; there was a dispute about whether the sculptures resemble or embody natural aspects of real-life jellyfish and whether Russell intentionally designed them to look like freshwater jellyfish.
Plaid’s consumer confusion expert, Dhar, used a “consumer journey approach,” designed to mimic what users would be seeing when deciding whether to buy or use a given product or service. This went to the claim that required evidence of damage to goodwill (that is, falseadvertising). Duelling marketing experts also mostly got in.
In another falseadvertising case challenging the undisclosed presence of child and slave labor in the supply chain, the Ninth Circuit rejected the existence of any duty to disclose because “the labor practices in question. The importance of PPV is easy to overlook. Plaintiffs failed to identify a relevant “defect” in the tests.
Marketing materials related to the 2016 version designate the same three valleys as “Regions of Origin,” and describes them as “premiere growing regions along Oregon’s coast.” The 2017 label also references the “coast” and includes a map of Oregon with leaves denoting the locations of the Willamette, Umpqua, and Rogue Valleys.
In fact, the name “Shelby” comes from Carroll Shelby, a race car driver and designer for Ford in the mid-20th century. This “Limp Mode” was an intentional design choice; the coolers were removed from those two packages before launch, allegedly to increase profit margins in their volume-leading Technology package.
Compared to the ‘rigorous’ approval process for prescription-drug labels, the TTB process ‘hinges on self reporting’ and reflects only the representations made to it by the distributor, not an endorsement of those claims.” BY VOL’ in light of the other flashier language and design of the packaging.”
Nor did plaintiffs’ survey report provide a way to define a reasonable consumer’s understanding of “All Natural,” because the court excluded it. At deposition, he said he was “test[ing]” the plaintiffs’ theory of liability, but the court interpreted his answers as showing that his questions were designed to support that theory.
reported some health-related benefit, with 33.9% Again, this “amounts to a disagreement on survey methodology, rather than suggestions that a survey could not be designed to test materiality in the first place.” If they did, they got a follow-up: In this survey, only 39.8% identified immunity support. Only 71.2%
but also narrows the issues somewhat; the larger infringement, cybersquatting, and falseadvertising claims can’t be resolved on summary judgment. Axon sued for infringement of the Taser word and design marks and for holding Taser-related domain names for ransom. However, the disclaimers were not ineffective as a matter of law.
It claims to focus on “counterfeits” that could harm consumer “health and safety,” but those are both lies designed to make the bill seem narrower and more balanced than it actually is. However, this bill is itself a giant counterfeit. ” I mean, pretty much every physical product meets this definition, right?
Challenges Under IP Law Dark patterns are deceptive or manipulative design elements or techniques used in user interfaces to trick users into taking actions they may not want to take. Falseadvertising and misleading representations: Dark patterns often involve misleading representations about products, services, or offers.
The trial court found Ethicon committed 153,351 violations of the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and 121,844 violations of the FalseAdvertising Law (FAL) and imposed a $1,250 civil penalty for each violation. But they don’t specify what constitutes a “violation,” which is decided on a case-by-case basis.
at 997-98, Rogers limited the application of the Lanham Act’s prohibition on falseadvertising “to apply to artistic works only where the public interest in avoiding consumer confusion outweighs the public interest in free expression. ” Id. In VIP Products v. Jack Daniels Products , 953 F.3d 3d 1170 , 1172 (9 th Cir.
The third category lists notable developments on the legislative and policy side and includes important amendments, proposals for amendments, release of policy notes and reports etc. Controller of Patents & Designs Patent Office Mumbai. Controller of Patents and Designs and Raytheon Company v. In Microsoft v.
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