Tag Archives: preemption

Consumers can’t bring the claim that Pom could against Minute Maid

Posted on August 21, 2015 by rtushnet

Stansfield v. Minute Maid Co., 2015 WL 4873685, No. 4:14cv290 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 13, 2015)   The court kicked out consumer protection claims based on the same falsity alleged in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola, on the ground that they were … 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

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

What claims work when D allegedly drives P down in Google rank through copying?

Posted on July 17, 2015 by rtushnet

Ryoo Dental, Inc. v. Han, 2015 WL 4208580, No. 15–308 (C.D. Cal. Jul. 9, 2015)   Ryoo Dental, a dental practice, had a website to promote its services, and allegedly spent considerable sums on “search engine optimization fees, photographing, editing, … Continue reading →

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

False claims of FDA approval actionable under Lanham Act and state law

Posted on May 22, 2015 by rtushnet

Innovative Health Solutions, Inc. v. DyAnsys, Inc., 2015 WL 2398931, No. 14-cv-05207 (N.D. Cal. May 19, 2015)   IHS sells a medical device called P–STIM.  DyAnsys used to be the distributor of P-STIM in the US, but after it lost … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

FDA pre-approval doesn’t bar Lanham Act false advertising claim against device

Posted on May 21, 2015 by rtushnet

Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, GMBH, No. 14 Civ. 00585, 2015 WL 2359467 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 24, 2015)   Earlier discussion.  SPD argued that the FDCA barred Lanham Act false advertising claims against it because the FDA … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

SDNY allows consumer “organic” claims to proceed

Posted on May 13, 2015 by rtushnet

Segedie v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., 2015 WL 2168374, No. 14–cv–5029 (S.D.N.Y. May 7, 2015)   Plaintiffs bought Earth’s Best food, body care, and home care products, and alleged that they were misleadingly labeled as “organic,” “natural,” or “all natural.”  … Continue reading →

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

District court largely upholds mandatory GE disclosures

Posted on May 4, 2015 by rtushnet

Grocery Manufacturers Assoc. v. Sorrell, 2015 WL 1931142, No. 5:14–cv–117 (D. Vt. Apr. 27, 2015)   Relax, we’ll be here for a while.   Vermont passed a law, Act 120, requiring that manufacturers and retailers identify whether raw and processed … Continue reading →

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

8th Circuit dismisses right of publicity claim as copyright preempted

Posted on April 23, 2015 by rtushnet

Ray v. ESPN, Inc., No. 14-2117 (8th Cir. Apr. 22, 2015)   Steve “Wild Thing” Ray wrestled professionally in the Universal Wrestling Federation (UWF) from 1990 to 1994. ESPN obtained films of his wrestling matches and re-telecast them without his … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Reading list: class ascertainability & preemption of state sound recording public perf. rights

Posted on April 21, 2015 by rtushnet

Geoffrey C. Shaw, Class Ascertainability, forthcoming, Yale Law J. (2015) Abstract:   In recent years, federal courts have been enforcing an “implicit” requirement for class certification, in addition to the explicit requirements established in Rule 23 of the Federal Rules … Continue reading →

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