-
Recent Posts
- Fairlife brand name plausibly misleading where cows allegedly lived abuse-filled lives of suffering
- disgorgement can’t be a lottery windfall–even when D was engaged in illegal gambling
- CFP: emerging First Amendment scholars
- “ambiguity” is taking hold in consumer protection class actions, but it’s not the Lanham Act concept
- conducting dueling internet searches converts attys into fact witnesses in TM case
Recent Comments
Archives
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- June 2013
Categories
- 230
- acpa
- advertising
- antitrust
- art law
- attribution
- blogging
- california
- cfaa
- cfps
- class actions
- cmi
- comics
- commercial speech
- conferences
- consumer protection
- contracts
- copying
- copyright
- counterfeiting
- cultural property
- damages
- dastar
- defamation
- design patent
- dilution
- disclosures
- disparagement
- dmca
- drm
- fan fiction
- fanworks
- fda
- fees
- first amendment
- ftc
- geographic indications
- http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post
- insurance
- jurisdiction
- libraries
- misappropriation
- music
- my lawsuits
- my writings
- parody
- patent
- patents
- preemption
- presentations
- privacy
- procedure
- reading list
- remedies
- right of publicity
- secondary liability
- securities
- standing
- surveys
- teaching
- tortious interference
- trade secrets
- trademark
- traditional knowledge
- Uncategorized
- unconscionability
- unfairness
- warranties
Meta
Tag Archives: class actions
Legal Applications of Marketing Theory, part 4
Legal Applications of Marketing Theory, part 4 Steve Ansolbahahere & Jacob Gersen, Harvard University, Dept of Government & Harvard Law School, Consumer Confusion in the Law of Food (Are People Misled?) Pom Wonderful case: Pom Wonderful Pomegranate Blueberry 100% juice; … Continue reading
“soluble” coffee case grinds on
Suchanek v. Sturm Foods, Inc., 2018 WL 6617106, No. 11-CV-565-NJR-RJD (S.D. Ill. Jul. 3, 2018) I don’t know why this took so long to show up in my searches, but: this is a consumer protection class action arising from Sturm’s … Continue reading
Settlements allowing competitors to use term doesn’t insulate Clorox from its own possible deception
Gregorio v. Clorox Co., 2018 WL 732673, No. 17-cv-03824 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2018) Gregorio alleged that, to capitalize on consumer demand for “natural” home cleaning products, Clorox falsely advertised its “Green Works” cleaning products as “natural” or “naturally derived.” … Continue reading
9th Circuit burps up a correction to recent Gerber case
Bruton v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 15-15174, 2017 WL 3016740, — Fed. Appx. — (9th Cir. Jul. 17, 2017) On a petition for rehearing, the previous panel opinion and partial dissent were withdrawn and replaced with the following, still partially … Continue reading
Another outlet price deception case, with pictures
Stathakos v. Columbia Sportswear Co., 2017 WL 1957063, No. 15-cv-04543 (N.D. Cal. May 11, 2017) The parties sued Columbia, bringing the usual California claims, for alleged use of deceptive and misleading reference prices on merchandise in its company-owned Columbia outlet … Continue reading
9th Circuit revives class action against allegedly mislabeled baby food
Bruton v. Gerber Prods. Co., 2017 WL 1396221, — Fed.Appx. —-, No. 15-15174 (9th Cir. Apr. 19, 2017) Bruton sued Gerber, alleging that labels on certain Gerber baby food products included claims about nutrient and sugar content that were impermissible … Continue reading
internal studies on consumer preference support class action treatment for weed killer claims
Martin v. Monsanto Co., No. 16–2168, 2017 WL 1115167 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2017) This case grants class certification, illustrating the use of internal consumer research in class action practice. The probabilistic nature of consumer reaction is not necessarily a … Continue reading
All in the game: misleading tennis racquet endorsements don’t support class certification
Ono v. Head Racquet Sports USA, Inc., No. CV 13–4222, 2016 WL 6647949 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2016)| Ono sued Head for deceiving the public “into believing that top-ranked professional tennis players actually used [Tour–Line Racquets] during competition,” bringing the … Continue reading
Settlement class can’t stand where settlement notice gave mistaken info
Duran v. Obesity Research Institute, LLC, No. D067917, 2016 WL 3913205 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 23, 2016) Duran sued ORI and Wal-Mart for allegedly falsely advertising the weight loss benefits of Lipozene and MetaboUp. The court approved a claims-made settlement … Continue reading
California claims for injunctive relief can’t be remanded after CAFA removal
Mezzadri v. Medical Depot, Inc., 113 F. Supp. 3d 1061 (S.D. Cal. 2015) The rule against claim-splitting clashes with the injustice of the ability of a defendant to destroy a form of relief by removing a complaint from state … Continue reading