Tag Archives: standing

OJ may be guilty … of adding ingredients without disclosure

In re: Simply Orange Orange Juice Marketing & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2361, 2017 WL 3142095 (W.D. Mo. Jul. 24, 2017) Plaintiffs alleged that Coca-Cola sold Simply Orange, Minute Maid Pure Squeezed, and Minute Maid Pure Premium without disclosing … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Second Circuit holds that allegations of “systematic” underweighing plead injury in fact for specific individual

John v. Whole Foods Market Gp., Inc., 858 F.3d 732 (2d. Cir. 2017) John filed a putative class action under GBL §§ 349-350 alleging that New York City Whole Foods grocery stores systematically overstated the weights of pre-packaged food products … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Certified party lacks standing to challenge certifier’s claims to fairness

Camarda v. Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc, 2015 WL 13159050, No. 13-00871 (D.D.C. Jul. 6, 2015) Westlaw’s impenetrable algorithm threw this up, and I’m blogging it now because of the relatively rare discussion of direct causation under Lexmark.  … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

a true story of a false advertising claim based on a “true story”

Incarcerated Entertainment, LLC v. Warner Bros. Pictures, No. 16-cv-1302 (M.D. Fla. May 10, 2017) Plaintiff alleged that it owned the rights to the life story of Efraim Diveroli and sued Warner for false advertising and unfair competition, based on Warner’s … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Having a product in development isn’t enough for Lanham Act standing

Pulse Health LLC v. Akers Biosciences, Inc., 2017 WL 1371272, No. 16-cv-01919 (D. Or. Apr. 14, 2017) Pulse was formed to develop a product that can measure aldehyde molecules in human breath via a non-invasive hand-held device. Its device was … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Lexmark injury requirement no bar to competitor’s standing at pleading stage

Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., 2017 WL 1229707,  No. 06–cv–00605 (D. Colo. Mar. 31, 2017) Crocs sued Effervescent for patent infringement; in 2006, defendants moved to stay the case pending ITC proceedings.  In 2015, defendant Dawgs moved to reopen the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

GM’s defeat device is almost by definition fraudulent omission

Counts v. General Motors, LLC, No. 16-cv-12541, 2017 WL 588457 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 14, 2017) Plaintiffs sued GM for deceptive advertising, breach of contract, and fraudulent concealment claims under the laws of thirty states based on GM’s alleged installation of … Continue reading

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