-
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
claims against Starbucks fruit drinks without named fruit can continue
Kominis v. Starbucks Corp., 2023 WL 6066199, No. 22 Civ. 6673 (JPC) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2023) Plaintiffs alleged violations of New York and California law based on Starbucks’ allegedly misleading use of fruit words for drinks. The court allowed some … Continue reading
Are Burger King menu boards whoppers?
Coleman v. Burger King Corp., No. 22-cv-20925-ALTMAN (S.D. Fla. Aug. 25, 2023) Plaintiffs alleged that Burger King, through its advertisements and in-store ordering boards, “materially overstates” the size of (and the amount of beef contained in) many of its burgers … Continue reading
claim that Adidas NHL jerseys are not “authentic” versions of on-ice jerseys can proceed
Smith v. Adidas America, Inc., 2023 WL 5672576, No. 6:22-cv-788 (BKS/ML) (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2023) A non-food case litigated by Spencer Sheehan, just profiled in this New Yorker article. Smith brought claims under NY and other consumer protection laws as … Continue reading
SlimFast products aren’t “clinically proven,” even if the SlimFast plan is, allowing false advertising claim to survive
McCracken v. KSF Acquisition Corp., 2023 WL 5667869, No. 5:22-cv-01666-SB-SHK (C.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2023) McCracken alleged that SlimFast food products were falsely advertised as “CLINICALLY PROVEN [ – ] LOSE WEIGHT & KEEP IT OFF” on the front of … Continue reading
plaintiff has standing to seek injunctive relief against allegedly falsely advertised penile implant
Peña v. International Medical Devices, Inc., No. 2:22-cv-03391-SSS-PLAx, 2023 WL 5667568 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2023) Plaintiff brought the usual California statutory claims against Penuma, a penile implant/procedure, for alleged misstatements about Penuma’s safety and efficacy. Here, we deal only … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, remedies, standing
Leave a comment
court certifies “C+Collagen” class even if consumers don’t know that all collagen is from animals
Gunaratna v. Dennis Gross Cosmetology LLC, No. CV 20-2311-MWF (GJSx), 2023 WL 5505052 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2023) Previously, the court denied a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claim that “C + Collagen” was misleading because defendant’s product had no collagen. … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged class actions, consumer protection, false advertising
Leave a comment
are state rules limiting class actions in consumer protection cases procedural or substantive?
Jones v. Varsity Brands, LLC, 2023 WL 5662590, No. 2:20-cv-02892-SHL-tmp (W.D. Tenn. Aug. 31, 2023) Varsity is a “prominent host of competitive cheerleading competitions and camps,” aka a monopolist. I’m just going to focus on the consumer protection-related claims, because … Continue reading
“Face” sunscreen 2x as expensive as regular plausibly misleading when formula was the same
Akes v. Beiersdorf, Inc., 2023 WL 5000434, No. 3:22-cv-869 (JBA) (D. Conn. Aug. 4, 2023) Akes brought the usual California claims/unjust enrichment, alleging that she was misled by the labeling of the 2.5-ounce bottle of Coppertone Sport Mineral sunscreen as … Continue reading
Paul Mitchell plausibly not “cruelty free” because of entry into market requiring animal testing
Heagney v. John Paul Mitchell Sys., 2023 WL 4947974, No. 23-cv-00687-VC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2023) A smoothly written opinion: As the complaint tells it, Paul Mitchell has long marketed its business and its products as “cruelty-free.” The plaintiffs say … Continue reading
Hall v. Marriott Int’l, Inc., No. 19cv1715-JO-AHG, 2023 WL 4417265, — F.R.D. – (S.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 2023) Previous opinion in this case about allegedly deceptive/inadequately disclosed mandatory “resort fees.” The court ends up certifying an issues California class, but … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged class actions, consumer protection, false advertising
Leave a comment