Category Archives: fda

Preclusion lives even after Pom Wonderful

JHP Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Hospira, Inc., 2014 WL 4988016, No. CV 13–07460 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2014) Pom Wonderful had a lot of broad language in it, and there is a pattern in which lower courts interpret Supreme Court Lanham … Continue reading

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

SCIPR: false advertising

Lexmark Int’l v. Static Control Components (Standard for determining standing for false advertising claim under the Lanham Act.) POM Wonderful v. Coca-Cola (Standing under the Lanham Act to challenge food or beverage label as false or misleading though regulated by … Continue reading

Posted in conferences, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing | Leave a comment

Pom doesn’t change preclusion analysis for medical devices

Catheter Connections, Inc. v. Ivera Medical Corp., 2014 WL 3536573, No. 2:14–CV–70 (D. Utah, July 17, 2014) The parties compete in the medical device market for infection-control devices.  At issue here are disinfectant caps incorporated into intravenous (IV) lines that … Continue reading

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

Reading list: food law

Regent University’s law review had a symposium on food law.  Here are the resulting articles, essentially all about advertising/disclosures: Foreword: Food Law and Its Place at the Legal Academy Michael T. Roberts Defining Natural Foods: The Search for a Natural … Continue reading

Posted in advertising, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, reading list | Leave a comment

You have to laugh or you’ll cry: supplement regulation

John Oliver has yet another fantastic, and accurate, advertising law-related story, this time focusing on the deliberate unregulation of dietary supplements. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in advertising, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

Such a lonely word: "honest" isn’t puffery

Salazar v. Honest Tea, Inc., 2014 WL 2593601, No. 2:13-cv-02318 (E.D. Cal. June 10, 2014) Salazar alleged that HT’s Honey Green Tea bottles didn’t contain the amount of antioxidants represented on their labels, where independent lab testing determined that the … Continue reading

Posted in california, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

POM Won: a summary of the ruling

POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., No. 12–761, 573 U.S. — (June 12, 2014) POM sued Coca-Cola for falsely advertising a “pomegranate blueberry” juice blend with 0.3% pomegranate juice and 0.2% blueberry juice. The Ninth Circuit found this claim precluded … Continue reading

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

The Pom Wonderful ruling has arrived

It is here.  Pom wins reversal. More to come. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

A little bit pregnant: miscounting pregnancy duration as false advertising

Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, GMBH, No. 14 Civ. 00585, 2014 WL 2526965 (S.D.N.Y. June 3, 2014) C&D sued SPD for false advertising over its pregnancy test advertising. The court denied SPD’s motion to dismiss. The … Continue reading

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

"generic" claims may be governed by FDA standard regardless of regulatory status

Mission Pharmacal Co. v. Virtus Pharmaceuticals, LLC, 2014 WL 2119237, No. 5:13–CA–176 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 28, 2014) (magistrate judge, report & recommendation adopted) This started as a patent infringement suit and added false advertising; the opinion here denies summary judgment … Continue reading

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment