-
Recent Posts
- Santa Clara IP Conference: Where Do We Go From Here?
- Santa Clara IP conference: How It’s Going: What Went Wrong?
- Santa Clara School of Law: Intellectual Property Conference: How It Started, How It’s Going: What Went Right?
- False endorsement claim can proceed against gov’t issued license plates and gov’t facility named for Roberto Clemente
- Non-TM owner can use 43(a) to challenge confusing use
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: consumer protection
“One a Day” plausibly misleads when consumers need to take more than one to get full benefit
Newman v. Bayer Corp., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2023 WL 6318523, No. 22-CV-7087 (KMK) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2023) Another day, another “One A Day” claim where the bottle instructs users that, you guessed it, a daily serving is more than one … Continue reading
identical product labeled “For children” and sold at higher price could be deceptive
Mendoza v. Procter & Gamble Co., No. CV 23-1382-DMG (JPRx), 2023 WL 8860900 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2023) Mendoza brought the usual California claims, alleging that Vicks Vapo cough and cold treatment products marketed as being for children were identical … Continue reading
Reasonable consumers may not be required to peel back labels in store to read drug facts
Zimmerman v. L’Oreal USA, Inc., 2023 WL 8587620, No. 22-cv-07609-HSG (N.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2023) This putative class action bringing the usual California statutory claims alleges that L’Oréal misleadingly advertises the sunscreen benefits of some of its cosmetic products, such … Continue reading
California’s UCL potentially available against junk fees
Sepanossian v. National Ready Mix Co., — Cal.Rptr.3d —-, 2023 WL 7590798, No. B319260 (Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2023) Sepanossian, who operates a construction business, filed a class action against Ready Mix, which sells mixed concrete to small businesses for … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged california, consumer protection, false advertising, unfairness
Leave a comment
alleged Haitian corruption doesn’t make collection of “foreign taxes” misleading or material
Celestin v. Martelly, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2023 WL 6385 (E.D.N.Y. 2023) Plaintiffs alleged Martelly, the then-President-elect of Haiti, devised a “wide-ranging scheme” to impose fees and fix prices on money transfers, food remittances, and international calls made to and from … Continue reading
Second Circuit finds false advertising claim against “reef safe” plausible
Richardson v. Edgewell Personal Care, LLC, 2023 WL 713094, No. 23-128 (2d Cir. Oct. 30, 2023) Richardson brought NYGBL claims against Edgewell’s “Reef Friendly*” and “*No Oxybenzone or Octinoxate”/“*Hawaii Compliant: No Oxybenzone or Octinoxate” sunscreens, alleging that the products contain … Continue reading
it is unfair to fail to disclose paid promotion/for influencers not to do due diligence on what they promote
In Re Ethereummax Investor Litig., No. CV 22-00163-MWF (SKx), 2023 WL 6787827 (C.D. Cal. Jun. 6, 2023) EMAX is a cryptocurrency project centered around the EthereumMax, which can be traded, spent, or otherwise transacted between token holders. EMAX Tokens were … Continue reading
Claims against “Southern Comfort” malt beverage not preempted
Del Rosario v. Sazerac Co., 2023 WL 6318083, No. 23-cv-1060 (AS) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2023) Sazerac sells a malt version of its famous Southern Comfort whiskey. Plaintiff alleged that Sazerac designed this malt version to look just like the original … Continue reading
EDNY judge doesn’t have a beef with Wendy’s and McDonald’s ads
Chimienti v. Wendy’s Int’l, LLC, No. 22-CV-02880 (HG), 2023 WL 6385346 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2023) Plaintiff alleged New York statutory and common law claims based on allegations that Wendy’s and McDonald’s misleadingly advertised the quantity of food contained in various … Continue reading