Category Archives: Uncategorized

selling w/in another distributor’s exclusive territory isn’t plausibly false advertising of authorization

Northern Bottling Co. v. Henry’s Foods, Inc., No. 1:19-cv-021, 2020 WL 4208526 (D.N.D. Jul. 22, 2020)  Northern is a PepsiCo bottler/distributor; it has some Exclusive Bottling Appointments that appoint Northern as PepsiCo’s “exclusive bottler, to bottle and distribute” a specific … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

IPSC, Trademark

IPSC – Trademark Law I Moderator: Mark McKenna  Trademark Depletion in a Global, Multilingual Economy: Evidence from the European Union (abstract) Jeanne Fromer and Barton Beebe, NYU School of Law  Notes on the EU system: runs in parallel with national … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The McCarthy Series: U.S.P.T.O. v. Booking.com: What the Recent SCOTUS Ruling Means for Trademark Law

My notes are messed up because I had technical difficulties! But the McCarthy Institute will apparently publish video on its YouTube channel. David Bernstein, Debevoise & Plimpton: intro to case/overview.  Hal Poret: Used a Teflon survey to educate consumers about … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

“graham cracker” is dead metaphor, implying nothing about graham flour content

Kennedy v. Mondelēz Global LLC, 2020 WL 4006197, No. 19-CV-302-ENV-SJB (E.D.N.Y. Jul. 10, 2020)  (R&R by someone I remember from my debate days, Sanket Bulsara)  Plaintiffs alleged that the terms “grahams” and “graham crackers,” along with other statements and images, … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

confusion over confusion: court holds that disparagement can be infringing

Nutreance LLC v. Primark, LLC, 2020 WL 3892995, No. 4:18-cv-00098-SRC (E.D. Mo. Jul. 10, 2020) “This is a trademark infringement/false advertising case involving competitors in the nutritional-supplements market.” The court holds that the alleged bad conduct is actionable, but unfortunately … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

July 29 Webinar – The McCarthy Series: What the BOOKING.COM Ruling Means for Trademark Law

I’ll be part of the panel:  On Wednesday, July 29th, at 12 noon Eastern Standard Time (9 AM PST), the McCarthy Institute will host a webinar to discuss the ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decision in USPTO. v. Booking.com B.V. … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Sue Bee beats suit: “pure” survey not good enough to show deception over trace pesticide amounts

Tran v. Sioux Honey Assoc., 2020 WL 3989444, No. 17-cv-00110-JLS-SS (C.D. Cal. Jul. 13, 2020)  Tran brought the usual California claims based on Sioux Honey products labeled as “Pure” and “100% Pure,” arguing that the products were mislabeled because they … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

expert can’t substitute for survey evidence (at least w/o experience w/consumer reactions)

Kurin, Inc. v. Magnolia Medical Technol., Inc., 2020 WL 4049977, No. 18-cv-1060-L-LL (S.D. Cal. Jul. 20, 2020)  A lot going on here in this false advertising case about blood collection devices (one called Steripath); I will omit a lot of … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

court rejects survey indicating consumers think “white chips” have white chocolate

Cheslow v. Ghirardelli Chocolate Co., No. 19-cv-07467-PJH, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2020 WL 4039365 (N.D. Cal. Jul. 17, 2020)  Plaintiffs brought the usual California claims against Ghirardelli’s “Premium Baking Chips Classic White Chips.” They sought to bolster the plausibility of the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

does unclean hands require actual deception? answers may differ for TM/false advertising

Certified Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Avicenna Nutraceutical, LLC, No. 18-56631, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2020 WL 4037411 (9th Cir. Jul. 17, 2020)  This memorandum opinion comes with a partial dissent calling out the majority’s differential treatment of §43(a)(1)(A) and (B) claims for … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment