-
Recent Posts
- (c) profits expert excluded for failure to tie profits to specific photos copied, instead of photos in general
- general allegations of harm to Legalforce from TM scammer sufficed for Lexmark standing
- More Kona coffee: false designation claims under 43(a)(1)(A), but not (B), can target retailers
- Pot site’s negative report on CBD from hops wasn’t commercial speech
- right of publicity question of the day, RBG edition
Recent Comments
Westreich Robert on Rebooted website Nanette Perry Hubert on claim to bring original formul… Leslie Adams on Clearblue’s pregnancy te… Alan Goldstein on ISP fails to dismiss (c) and C… 
Multi Time Machine V… on Back to the Future: 9th Cir. r… Archives
- 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
general allegations of harm to Legalforce from TM scammer sufficed for Lexmark standing
Legalforce RAPC Worldwide P.C. v. Glotrade, No. 19-CV-01538-LHK, 2019 WL 6036618 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2019) Legalforce “offers services including trademark preparation and prosecution, patent preparation and prosecution, copyright registration and counseling, international trademark and patent filings, and corporate formation … Continue reading
ThermoLife continues mixed record in pleading competitive injury from other supplements
ThermoLife International LLC v. Compound Solutions Inc., No. CV-19-01473-PHX-SMM, 2019 WL 5448804 (D. Ariz. Jul. 30, 2019) ThermoLife develops “amino acid nitrates used in dietary supplements to increase vasodilation,” and alleged that vasodilators are “included in nearly every pre-workout product … Continue reading
ingredient supplier has standing against disparagement of products/false claims about competing product
ThermoLife Int’l LLC v. Vital Pharms. Inc., No. 19-cv-61380-BLOOM/Valle, 2019 WL 4954622 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 8, 2019) ThermoLife licenses/sells a patented creatine nitrate used in dietary supplements, which is allegedly included in many top-selling dietary supplements. VPX allegedly attacked ThermoLife’s … Continue reading
Lexmark is super-clear: business customers can’t sue for Lanham Act false advertising
Jiaherb, Inc. v. MTC Indus., Inc., 2019 WL 4785784, Civil No. 18-15532 (KSH) (CLW) (D.N.J. Sept. 30, 2019) Brief but very clear statement: after Lexmark, business customers can’t bring Lanham Act claims. Jiaherb makes herbal extracts and other natural products, … Continue reading
false patent marking and implicit claims of Nobel connection in a supplement case
ThermoLife Int’l, L.L.C. v. NeoGenis Labs, Inc., 2019 WL 4193968, No. 18-cv-2980-HRH (D. Ariz. Sept. 4, 2019) ThermoLife allegedly holds a number of patents related to dietary supplement/food ingredients, including those related to “the use of amino acids in combination … Continue reading
Supplement ingredient supplier lacks Article III standing against supplement seller
ThermoLife International LLC v. American Fitness Wholesalers LLC, 2019 WL 3840988, No. CV-18-04189-PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Aug. 15, 2019) Courts really, really like to call the Lexmark issue “standing.” Here, though, the court goes further by finding the noncompetitor plaintiff—who makes … Continue reading
