-
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
FDCA preempts arguments that structure/function claims in fact mislead about disease prevention
Dachauer v. NBTY, Inc., — F.3d —-, 2019 WL 150016, No. 17-16242 (9th Cir. Jan. 10, 2019) Defendants make vitamin E supplements that claim, on their labels, to “support cardiovascular health” and to “promote[ ] immune function,” “immune health,” “heart … Continue reading
Almond milk name isn’t deceptive to reasonable consumers
Painter v. Blue Diamond Growers, No. 17-55901, 2018 WL 6720560, — Fed.Appx. —- (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2018) Painter alleged that Blue Diamond mislabeled its almond beverages as “almond milk” when they should be labeled “imitation milk” because they substitute … Continue reading
Juxtaposition of claims about protein amounts and sources plausibly creates falsity
Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HBS Int’l Corp., — F.3d —-, 2018 WL 6314282 , No. 17-13884 (11th Cir. Dec. 4, 2018) Hi-Tech sued HBS, alleging that the label of its protein-powder supplement HexaPro misled customers about the quantity and quality … Continue reading
This is personal: Diet Coke obesity suit dismissed even after repleading
Geffner v. Coca-Cola Co., 2018 WL 6039325, No. 17 Civ. 7952 (LLS) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2018) Plaintiffs alleged that, by marketing Diet Coke as “diet,” Coca-Cola misleads consumers into believing that drinking Diet Coke will assist in weight loss or … Continue reading
FDCA doesn’t preempt false advertising suit based on claims about protein source
Durnford v. MusclePharm Corp., — F.3d —-, 2018 WL 4938190, No. 16-15374 (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2018) Durnford brought the usual California consumer claims against MusclePharm for making false or misleading statements about the protein in one of its supplements. … Continue reading
Court presumes failure to comply w/FDA labeling rules to be misleading
Campbell v. Freshbev LLC, 322 F.Supp.3d 330 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) Campbell bought several bottles of Freshbev juices at Whole Foods, allegedly relying on misrepresentations (1) that the juices were unpasteurized; (2) that the juices were cold-pressed; (3) that the juices were … Continue reading
Lanham Act covers ads that drug is FDA-approved/has ANDA
Arbor Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. ANI Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2018 WL 3677923, No. 17-4910 (D. Minn. Aug. 2, 2018) Arbor sells prescription erythromycin ethylsuccinate for oral suspension, allegedly the only FDA-approved products of their kind on the market. ANI announced the launch … Continue reading
make your own sexual reference: 9th Circuit partially reinstates male enhancement lawsuit
Sandoval v. PharmaCare US, Inc., No. 16-56301, No. 16-56710, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2018 WL 1633011 (9th Cir. Apr. 5, 2018) Sandoval brought a putative class action claim based on PharmaCare’s statements about its “male enhancement” product IntenseX. The court of … Continue reading
Supplement maker can’t enjoin database changes, but avoids anti-SLAPP dismissal
Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., 2017 WL 6539909, No. 17-cv-04810 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2017) This is an interesting case about the FDA/Lanham Act interaction. Exeltis sells prenatal vitamins that contain 1 mg of folic acid. They aren’t … Continue reading