-
Recent Posts
- 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
- Santa Clara IP Conference: Where Do We Go From Here?
- Santa Clara IP conference: How It’s Going: What Went Wrong?
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: false advertising
“Made in the USA” materiality showing requires evidence, not just interested witness testimony
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. J-B Weld Co., No. 3:19-cv-1434 (JAM), 2024 WL 4117244 (D. Conn. Sept. 9, 2024) The parties compete in the sale of “chemical bonding products marketed for home and automotive use.” Here, the court kicks out … Continue reading
DC Court of Appeals revives greenwashing suit against Coca-Cola
Earth Island Institute v. Coca-Cola Co., — A.3d —-, 2024 WL 3976560, No. 22-CV-0895 (D.C. Aug. 29, 2024) Earth Island sued Coca-Cola under the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act, alleging that Coca-Cola engages in deceptive marketing that “misleads consumers into … Continue reading
FTC lacks jurisdiction over nonprofits, even sham ones, court rules
Federal Trade Commission v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2024 WL 3825087, No. CV-23-02711-PHX-DWL (D. Ariz. Aug. 15, 2024) The court here holds that the FTC lacks §5 jurisdiction over a nonprofit, even if the nonprofit was in … Continue reading
unexplained “3x more cutting power” could be false advertising when comparator was unexpected
Fiskars Finland OY AB v. Woodland Tools Inc., No. 22-cv-540-jdp, 2024 WL 3936444 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 26, 2024) The parties compete in the hand-held gardening tool market. Most of the claims failed on summary judgment, but part of Woodland’s claim … Continue reading
using results from one product to tout another isn’t passing off, but could be false advertising
Ortho-Tain, Inc. v. Colorado Vivos Therapeutics, Inc., 2024 WL 3925408, No. 20 C 4301 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 23, 2024) Ortho-Tain sued defendants (including a bunch of former employees); I’ll focus only on the Lanham Act claims alleging that they falsely … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged dastar, false advertising, false designation of origin
Leave a comment
Vizzy gets no kick from champagne, and that’s ok
West v. Molson Coors Beverage Co. USA, No. 23-cv-7547 (BMC), 2024 WL 3718613 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 7. 2024) Plaintiffs alleged that Molson deceived consumers into thinking that Vizzy contained champagne (used as a generic term throughout!) when it didn’t. The court … Continue reading
9th Circuit orders district court to reconsider statutory damages award to NY class under NY law
Montera v. Premier Nutrition Corporation, — F.4th —-, 2024 WL 3659589, No. 22-16375, 22-16622 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2024) The key legal issue here arises from the quirk that NY bans GBL §§ 349 and 350 class actions in state … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged class actions, consumer protection, damages, false advertising
Leave a comment
FDCA doesn’t preclude lawsuit based on allegedly false claims about compounding drugs
Pacira Biosciences, Inc. v. Nephron Sterile Compounding Center, LLC, No. 3:23-5552-CMC, 2024 WL 3656489 (D.S.C. Jul. 15, 2024) Pacira, which sells non-opioid pain management products, including Exparel, sued Nephron for false advertising. Exparel is “bupivacaine suspended in multivesicular liposomes,” and … Continue reading
Lanham Act unclean hands defenses are hard to win
World Nutrition Inc. v. Advanced Enzymes USA, No. CV-19-00265-PHX-GMS, 2024 WL 3665360 (D. Ariz. Aug. 6, 2024) The parties—here WNI and AST—sell enzyme supplements and sued each other under the Lanham Act, and both prevailed on their affirmative claims and … Continue reading
Court accepts survey with disclaimer control that causes 38% confusion
Another ruling in the PNC v. Plaid case: PNC Financial Services Gp. v. Plaid Inc., 2024 WL 3691607, No. 2:20-cv-1977 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 7, 2024) Daubert motions for this case. I’ll only discuss the stuff I find interesting. Kivetz … Continue reading