Proskauer on Advertising Law
Proskauer on Advertising Law
Photo of Alyson Tocicki

Alyson Tocicki

Associate

Alyson Tocicki is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the firm’s Trial Strategies practice group. Alyson handles high-profile and complex litigation matters across the country, with a particular emphasis on product liability, false advertising, and intellectual property disputes.

Alyson has experience representing clients at all stages of litigation, including drafting complaints, briefing dispositive motions, coordinating discovery, preparing for key fact and expert witness depositions, developing case themes for trial, and obtaining favorable outcomes for her clients at mediation. Her experience also spans a wide array of industries, such as media and entertainment, pharmaceuticals, professional sports, and consumer products.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Alyson earned her J.D. from the UCLA School of Law, where she served as a Managing Editor of the UCLA Law Review and President of the Student Bar Association. While at UCLA, Alyson was a legal writing advisor to first-year students and received the Masin Family Academic Excellence Gold Award for the highest grade in Negotiation Theory & Practice. Alyson also worked as a judicial extern for the Honorable Robert N. Kwan in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California.

Alyson was a summer associate in Proskauer’s Los Angeles office before joining the firm full-time.

Subscribe to all posts by Alyson Tocicki

On Notice: Misattributed, False, or Mischaracterized Endorsements

Continuing our series on the FTC’s Notice of Penalty Offenses Concerning Endorsements, this post considers the issues of falsely attributed, mischaracterized, and fabricated endorsements – practices that the FTC highlighted in its Notice as unfair or deceptive. In particular, the FTC stated that: It is an unfair or deceptive trade practice to make claims which … Continue Reading

“Butter” Luck Next Time: Court Finds California Cannot Preclude Vegan Dairy from Using “Vegan Butter” Labeling

Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California recently ruled in favor of Miyoko’s Kitchen in a suit concerning Miyoko’s labeling of its plant-based spread as “vegan butter.” In doing so, Judge Seeborg determined that absent evidence that the “vegan butter” label was false or would mislead consumers, the state of California could not … Continue Reading

The Rise and Fall of “Vanilla” Labeling Challenges

Beginning in 2020, the advertising world saw an explosion of putative class-actions challenging the use of “vanilla” to describe products where the vanilla flavoring allegedly is not derived exclusively from the vanilla bean plant.  We previously blogged about several such cases. One plaintiff’s attorney alone, Spencer Sheehan, has filed—and continues to file—hundreds of these cases.  … Continue Reading

Judge Looks “Kind”ly Upon Certifying Class in Snack Bar Advertising Suit

In a recent opinion out of the Southern District of New York, Judge William H. Pauley III certified three classes of plaintiffs in New York, California, and Florida who allege that KIND LLC, the manufacturer of KIND Bars, deceptively marketed several products as “all natural” and “non-GMO,” even though they purportedly contain synthetic and genetically … Continue Reading

A Dose of Relief: Federal Judge Dismisses Walgreens Infant Acetaminophen Class Action

Judge Edward Davila of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California recently dismissed with prejudice a putative class action alleging Walgreens misled consumers into believing its store-brand Infants’ Pain & Fever Acetaminophen is specially formulated for infants.  In dismissing the suit, the court found the product’s labeling would not be likely to … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Claws Back “Krab Mix” Class Action Dismissal

A split Ninth Circuit panel recently reversed the dismissal of claims against P.F. Chang’s regarding the chain’s use of the term “krab mix” in the ingredients list for certain sushi rolls. Kang v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, No. 20-55138 (9th Cir. Feb. 9, 2021). Plaintiff claimed he purchased P.F. Chang’s “krab mix” sushi rolls because … Continue Reading
LexBlog

Proskauer and our platform provider LexBlog each use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze traffic. Each of us also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. If you are happy for us to store these cookies on your device please click 'Accept Cookies.' For more information, please see here and here.

OK