-
Recent Posts
- Promoting Progress part 2 at AU WCL
- Promoting Progress: 50 Years of the Copyright Act from the Perspective of the Public Interest
- Second Annual Aspiring Free Speech Scholars Workshop
- court allows TM and false advertising claims against “toxic backlink” SEO disparagement campaign (SEM, for minimization?)
- Instagram disparagement by alleged competitor isn’t commercial speech
Recent Comments
Archives
- June 2026
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- 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: fda
9th Circuit reverses dismissal where plaintiff plausibly alleges that an ingredient is non-natural flavoring
Trammell v. KLN Enterprises, Inc., No. 24-6097 (9th Cir. May 15, 2026) Perfect summary: The defendant company in this case represented to consumers that its berry snacks product contained no artificial flavors. The plaintiff bought the product believing the representation … Continue reading
high sugar content doesn’t make “Breakfast Essentials” name or health claims misleading
Testori v. Nestlé Health Science US Holdings, Inc., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2026 WL 1282540, No. 1:25-cv-01318-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal. May 11, 2026) The court dismissed California claims against Carnation Breakfast Essentials Nutritional Drink. The drink label highlighted its 10g of protein … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, fda, preemption
Leave a comment
compounding pharmacies lose a round with Lilly on personalized medicine and GLP-1 comparison claims
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Mochi Health Corp., 2026 WL 1076831, No. 25-cv-03534-JSC (N.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2026) Eli Lilly’s claims were previously dismissed, and Lilly tried again with claims under California’s UCL, Lanham Act false advertising, and civil conspiracy. … Continue reading
compounding pharmacies lose a round with Lilly on personalized medicine and GLP-1 comparison claims
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Mochi Health Corp., 2026 WL 1076831, No. 25-cv-03534-JSC (N.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2026) Eli Lilly’s claims were previously dismissed, and Lilly tried again with claims under California’s UCL, Lanham Act false advertising, and civil conspiracy. … Continue reading
Reading list: consumer protection and the industries who regularly sue their regulators
Nicholas R. Parrillo, Administrative Law as a Choice of Business Strategy: Comparing the Industries Who Have Routinely Sued Their Regulators with the Industries Who Rarely Have George Washington Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 5, pp. 1031-1195 (2025) Abstract: For some … Continue reading
claims about scientific studies might imply FDA approval
BioGaia USA, LLC v. Probiotiv Naturals LLC, 2025 WL 2946910, No. CV 25-3592 PA (MBKx) (C.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2025) BioGaia sued Probiotiv – a competitor in the sale of priobiotic dietary supplements for oral health, for false advertising; Probiotiv … Continue reading
pharmacos face judicial resistance to claims against compounding pharmacies for weight loss drugs
Three cases showing aspects of the challenges, only one of which even partially survives: Novo Nordisk, Inc. v. Brooksville Pharm. Inc., 785 F.Supp.3d 1123 (M.D. Fla. 2025) Novo Nordisk sells FDA-approved drugs containing semaglutide, Wegovy, Ozempic, and Rybelsus. Brooksville is … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, fda, preclusion, preemption
Leave a comment
mislabeling nut ingredients doesn’t justify class action because not everyone has nut allergies
Fukaya v. Daiso California LLC, No. 23-cv-00099-RFL, 2025 WL 2644747 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 15, 2025) Fukaya, who is allergic to tree nuts, alleged that Daiso failed to properly label its pre-packaged food products as containing tree nuts on its English-language … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, fda, preemption
Leave a comment
court finds unique tracking of units of fluoride products immaterial even if vaguely safety-related
Method Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. H2-Pharma, LLC, 2025 WL 2298395, No. 2:20-cv-753-ECM (M.D. Ala. Aug. 8, 2025) Method asked the court to reconsider its ruling granting summary judgment on certain false advertising claims to H2, which sells a fluoride product as … Continue reading
P&G’s brand extension ZzzQuil must face lawsuit alleging falsity of its “Non-Habit Forming” claim
Sneed v. Procter & Gamble Company, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2025 WL 1017933, No. 23-cv-05443-JST (N.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2025) This case is about a product I recently noticed, “Nighttime Sleep Aid” products containing diphenhydramine hydrochloride as ZzzQuil. Sneed alleged that … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, fda, preemption
Leave a comment