-
Recent Posts
- court rejects politician’s slogan claim
- no abuse of discretion in PI requiring advertiser to terminate liens that it told homeowners weren’t liens
- “monk fruit sweetener” plausibly should have more than 1.15% monkfruit
- trademark law firm loses trademark lawsuit
- license agreement termination might be invalid transfer in gross without a new partner for licensor
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: standing
sitting by designation, Judge Bibas says there’s no de minimis exception to Lanham Act false advertising
Montway LLC v. Navi Transport Services LLC, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2025 WL 3151403, No. 25-cv-00381-SB (D. Del. Nov. 11, 2025) Judge Bibas either likes sitting by designation or is willing to take one for the team; here’s another of his … Continue reading
allegedly false claims for compounded weight loss drugs didn’t plausibly threaten Eli Lilly’s reputation
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Mochi Health Corp., 2025 WL 2998166, No. 25-cv-03534-JSC (N.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2025) Another of the cases in which Eli Lilly’s attempts to protect its GLP-antagonist market do surprisingly badly, once again highlighting the higher … Continue reading
general competitor has Lanham Act standing even if it doesn’t compete in alleged false advertiser’s subcategory
Colorado Biolabs, Inc. v. Three Arrows Nutra, LLC, No. 3:25-CV-0601-D, 2025 WL 2524313 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 2, 2025) CBL sued Three Arrows for breach of a settlement agreement and related claims; Three Arrows counterclaimed along similar lines. The parties sell … Continue reading
5th Circuit agrees that joint TM owners can’t sue each other under any Lanham Act theory
Reed v. Marshall, — F.4th —-, 2025 WL 1822673, No. 24-20198 (5th Cir. Jul. 2, 2025) Jade, an R&B, hip hop, and soul vocal group, rose to prominence in the 1990s. Jade disbanded in 1995, when the members began pursuing … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged dilution, false advertising, false designation of origin, standing, trademark
Leave a comment
honey producers have statutory standing to challenge Bayer’s claims to direct purchasers that herbicides were safe
Coy’s Honey Farm, Inc. v. Bayer Corp., MDL No.:1:18-md-02820-SNLJ, No. 1:21-CV-089-SNLJ, 2025 WL 901264 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 25, 2025) Coy’s s a beekeeping and honey-producing operation. It alleged that dicamba-based herbicide products, including those produced by defendants, moved away from … Continue reading
National Republican Senatorial Committee loses ROP/Lanham Act/UCL claims against alleged “Scam PAC”
National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Red Senate, 2025 WL 819711, No. 8:24-cv-02301-JVS-KES (C.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2025) NRSC sued Red State, alleging that it was exploiting Senator Rick Scott’s “name, image, and likeness without his consent to deceive and scam … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged california, false advertising, right of publicity, standing, unfairness
Leave a comment
discovery rule applies to false “reference price” allegations at outlet stores
Clark v. Eddie Bauer LLC, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2025 WL 814924, No. 2:20-cv-01106-RAJ (W.D. Wash. Mar. 12, 2025) A good choice for publication given that the opinion addresses (and rejects) some arguments I haven’t seen before. Clark sued Eddie Bauer … Continue reading
CAFA can’t prevent remand to state court where consumer protection claims are all equitable
Haver v. General Mills, Inc., 2024 WL 4492052, No.: 3:24-cv-01269-CAB-MMP (S.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2024) Interesting remand to state court. Haver sued under the UCL and FAL, alleging that GM deceptively marketed “Fruit Snacks” to contain “Real Fruit Juice,” when … Continue reading
9th Circuit refuses to kick out claim over benzene in sunscreen on standing
Bowen v. Energizer Holdings, Inc., — F.4th —-, 2024 WL 4352496, No. 23-55116 (9th Cir. Oct. 1, 2024) Bowen sued Energizer for false advertising, alleging that its Banana Boat sunscreen was adulterated with dangerous levels of benzene, a carcinogen that … Continue reading
small competitor lacks standing against big one’s nondisparaging advertising
HomeLight, Inc. v. Shkipin, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2024 WL 940089 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2024) Sometimes, courts are very generous to competitors in presuming Lanham Act standing—as with the recent Meta ruling—and sometimes they aren’t. I have yet to detect a … Continue reading