Tag Archives: false advertising

Washington Supreme Court rejects private standing for discount misrepresentations

Montes v. Sparc Group LLC, 2026 WL 900481, No. 104162-4, — P.3d —-, 2026 WL 900481 (Wash. Apr. 2, 2026) Interpreting the Washington Consumer Protection Act, the state supreme court held, over a dissent, that buying products that are falsely … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Beyond the Dog’s tactics in employment dispute may have been beyond the pale

Beyond The Dog, LLC v. Salzer, 2026 WL 884140, No. 3:24-cv-1439 (VAB) (D. Conn. Mar. 31, 2026) Plaintiffs (BTD) sued defendants Salzer and Canine Behavioral Blueprints, LLC over a failed working relationship, resulting in claims for trade secret misappropriation, breach … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

naked licensing could constitute false advertising of origin

Epson America, Inc. v. Global Aiptek Inc., 2025 WL 4631973, No. 8:23-cv-00222-FWS-DFM (C.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2025) Epson alleged that defendant GAI purposefully and deceptively inflated the lumen and brand specifications of its projectors in violation of the Lanham Act … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

lack of harm allegations beyond “direct competition plus customer inquiries” insufficient for false advertising standing

Kalmbach Feeds, Inc. v. Purina Animal Nutrition, LLC, 2026 WL 598608, No. 2:25-cv-00617 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 4, 2026) Previously. Kalmbach sued Defendant Purina for false advertising under state and federal law in connection with its Farm to Flock chicken feed, … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

court gives guidance on disclaimer placement, AI alterations in enforcement proceeding

InSinkErator LLC v. Joneca Company LLC, 2025 WL 4631972, No. 8:24-cv-02600-JVS-ADS (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2025) Previous discussion of this false advertising case. In a separate order, the court deals with other compliance issues than those below. It rejects the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

delay still defeats Lanham Act presumption of irreparable harm

Skillz Platform Inc. v. Voodoo SAS, 2026 WL 717220, No. 24-CV-4991 (VSB) (JW) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2026) Skillz sought an injunction against defendants’ allegedly false representations about not using bots, and against defendants’ use of bots, in their gaming applications. … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

damages requirement trips up another false advertising case with sophisticated customers

Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Axion Biosystems, Inc., 2026 WL 734986, No. 23-198-CJB (D. Del. Mar. 12, 2026) Agilent alleged patent infringement and false advertising by Axion in the advertising of its impedance-based cell assay products. E.g., “The simple and sensitive … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

drug makers face rocky road in making claims against sellers of compounded weight loss drugs

Three different cases reading Lexmark differently but mostly kicking out claims: Eli Lilly & Co. v. Aios, Inc., 2026 WL 836624, No. 25-cv-03535-HSG (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2026) Eli Lilly sells Mounjaro and Zepbound, GLP-1 inhibitors containing tirzepatide. These are the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

CEO/sole owner is liable to bankruptcy estate for deliberate false advertising campaign that ended in bankruptcy

In re Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (VPX Liquidating Trust v. Owoc), 2026 WL 822473, No. 22-17842-PDR, Adv. Pro. No. 24-01009-PDR (Bkrcy. S.D. Fla. Mar. 24, 2026) This is an interesting case about false advertising and individual officer liability in bankruptcy. The … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

court dismisses vague false advertising counterclaims but allows challenge to Wonderful’s pistachio trade dress

Wonderful Co. v. Nut Cravings Inc., No. 1:21-cv-03960 (MKV), 2026 WL 818073 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 24, 2026) Wonderful sued Nut Cravings for infringing its pistachio package trade dress. This opinion deals only with Nut Cravings’ counterclaims, which mostly survive except for … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment