-
Recent Posts
- court rejects TM owner’s attempt to require full chain of custody for first sale defense, but where is the burden of proof?
- Temu’s “cheaper and way better quality than Shein” claims were potentially falsifiable, not puffery
- Dueling geneologists: photo (c) claims allowed, but not Lanham Act or factual compilation claims
- false advertising’s injury requirement causes reverse passing off claim to fail
- laches, once established, bars Lanham Act claims even during more recent periods
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: standing
local ad company has Lanham Act standing against Meta for allegedly overstating ad reach
Metroplex Communic., Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., 2024 WL 940127, No. 22-cv-1455-SMY (S.D. Ill. Mar. 5, 2024) Metroplex, a local advertising company, brought a putative class action against Meta for unfair competition. Although Meta argued that Metroplex was an ad … Continue reading
prospective injunctive relief for consumers hangs on in 9th Circuit for now
Clark v. Eddie Bauer LLC, 2024 WL 177755, No. 21-35334 (9th Cir. Jan. 17, 2024) This unpublished opinion has a dissent from Judge Bea indicating further disruptions in standing may be coming. Clark appealed the dismissal of her putative class … Continue reading
over dissent, 6th Circuit holds that large player in fragmented market could show proximate cause under Lexmark
Campfield v. Safelite Gp., Inc., — F.4th —-, 2024 WL 164976, Nos. 22-3204/3225 (6th Cir. Jan. 16, 2024) Over a dissent in relevant part, the court revived plaintiff Ultra Bond’s Lanham Act claim relating to vehicle glass repair and replacement … Continue reading
who has standing to challenge robot lawyers?
MillerKing, LLC v. DoNotPay, Inc., — F.Supp.3d —-, No. 3:23-CV-863-NJR, 2023 WL 8108547 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 17, 2023) “This case pits real lawyers against a robot lawyer.” Spoiler: the robot wins for lack of Article III standing. DoNotPay is an … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged false advertising, false designation of origin, standing
Leave a comment
TM co-owner can’t challenge uses authorized by other co-owners (bonus Lexmark reasoning)
Reed v. Marshall, 2023 WL 6963661, No. H-21-3942 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 20, 2023) In 1991, Reed and defendants Marshall and Harris formed the recording group Jade, and in 1992 they signed an exclusive recording agreement with a now-defunct label, Giant. … Continue reading
Proximate cause defeats false advertising claims against standard setting body allegedly packed by competitors
Geomatrix, LLC v. NSF International, — F.4th —-, 2023 WL 5925977, No. 22-1947 (6th Cir. Sept. 12, 2023) Discussion of opinion below. Geomatrix sells a septic system that substantially differs from those sold by its competitors. It asserts defendants, those … Continue reading
SlimFast products aren’t “clinically proven,” even if the SlimFast plan is, allowing false advertising claim to survive
McCracken v. KSF Acquisition Corp., 2023 WL 5667869, No. 5:22-cv-01666-SB-SHK (C.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2023) McCracken alleged that SlimFast food products were falsely advertised as “CLINICALLY PROVEN [ – ] LOSE WEIGHT & KEEP IT OFF” on the front of … Continue reading
plaintiff has standing to seek injunctive relief against allegedly falsely advertised penile implant
Peña v. International Medical Devices, Inc., No. 2:22-cv-03391-SSS-PLAx, 2023 WL 5667568 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2023) Plaintiff brought the usual California statutory claims against Penuma, a penile implant/procedure, for alleged misstatements about Penuma’s safety and efficacy. Here, we deal only … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged consumer protection, false advertising, remedies, standing
Leave a comment
over aggressive partial dissent, 11th Cir. allows some class claims against Ford “track ready” claims to proceed
Tershakovec v. Ford Motor Company, Inc., — F.4th —-, 2023 WL 4377585, No. 22-10575 (11th Cir. Jul. 7, 2023) Discussion of district court opinion. Ford advertised its Shelby GT350 Mustang as “track ready.” “But some Shelby models weren’t equipped for … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged class actions, consumer protection, false advertising, first amendment, standing
Leave a comment
conclusory allegations of confusion don’t allege statutory standing for TM claim
Blacks in Technology Int’l v. Greenlee, 2023 WL 4186376, No. 3:20-CV-3008-X (N.D. Tex. Jun. 26, 2023) On one side: Blacks in Technology International (BIT International), Blacks United in Leading Technology International (BUILT), and Blacks in Technology, Texas (BIT Texas). On … Continue reading