Tag Archives: false advertising

Another internal website search engine case survives motion to dismiss

Posted on September 8, 2015 by rtushnet

Stiles v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2015 WL 5173060, No. 2:14–CV–2234 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 2, 2015) (magistrate judge)   Stiles allegedly patented the “Stiles Razor,” the only personal styling razor with a 1/8” blade and ergonomic handle allowing for safe and … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Upset tummies at P&G: Sixth Circuit affirms class certification on “snake oil” theory

Posted on August 28, 2015 by rtushnet

Rikos v. Procter & Gamble Co., — F.3d —-, 2015 WL 4978712 (6th Cir. June 16, 2015)   A court of appeals affirms the certification of a consumer protection class action, a rarity worth noting.   Plaintiffs bought Align, P&G’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Court finds misleading omissions can deprive ISP of 230 protection

Posted on August 21, 2015 by rtushnet

General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, No. 14-cv-01932, 2015 WL 4911585 (D. Colo. Aug. 18, 2015)   General Steel sued Chumley and Atlantic Building, of which he was CEO, for false advertising, libel, and intentional interference with prospective business … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Copyright infringement is channeled into (c), not state or Lanham Act claims

Posted on August 19, 2015 by rtushnet

Quadratec, Inc. v. Turn 5, Inc., 2015 WL 4876314, No. 13–6384 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 13, 2015)   The parties compete to sell removable soft tops and other aftermarket parts and accessories for Jeep vehicles. Quadratec alleged that it invests substantial … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

overclaiming study results to apply to unstudied product can be false/misleading

Posted on August 10, 2015 by rtushnet

In re Riddell Concussion Reduction Litig., No. 13–7585, 2015 WL 4640425 (D.N.J. Aug. 3, 2015)   The plaintiffs sued Riddell for marketing football helmets based on allegedly false or misleading claims that the helmets were equipped with unique concussion reduction … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

IPSC: Copyright again

Posted on August 7, 2015 by rtushnet

Copyright History Shyam Balganesh University of Pennsylvania Law School The Questionable Origins of the Copyright Infringement Analysis   Jerome Frank’s infamous/canonical © infringement test from Arnstein v. Porter, influential across the country. Step 1: actual copying, dissection allowed, expert testimony … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another circuit agrees that Dastar-barred claims can’t be repled as false advertising

Posted on August 7, 2015 by rtushnet

Kehoe Component Sales Inc. v. Best Lighting Products, Inc., — F.3d —-, No. 14–3347, 2015 WL 4635824 (6th Cir. Aug. 5, 2015)   Best asked Kehoe (“Pace”) to make specialized lighting products for Best.  After Pace made enough units to … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

IPSC: Other IP

Posted on August 6, 2015 by rtushnet

Other IP  [Insert wry commentary about “fringe” fields like advertising law]   Sarah Burstein, The University of Oklahoma College of Law Reviving Ornamentality    Fed. Cir. killed the doctrine.  Statute says new, original, and ornamental designs can get a design … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Presumption of injury saves Lanham Act monetary award

Posted on August 5, 2015 by rtushnet

General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2015 WL 4591924, Nos. 14–1119, 14–1121 (10th Cir. July 31, 2015)   Chumley formerly worked for General Steel, then founded Armstrong after an unfriendly parting.  The parties compete to sell … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

4th Circuit denies rehearing in In re GNC

Posted on July 29, 2015 by rtushnet

😦 If this ruling sticks and is actually applied in Lanham Act cases (something of which I am uncertain), then the resulting circuit split would probably justify Supreme Court review, given the Court’s newfound interest in 43(a)(1)(B). from Blogger http://ift.tt/1SguBHc

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment