Jeff Warshafsky
Partner
Jeff Warshafsky is a partner in the Litigation Department. Jeff is a versatile commercial litigator with a particular emphasis on sports litigation and false advertising, trademark and counterfeiting disputes.
Jeff regularly represents clients in consumer class actions, Lanham Act cases, and advertising self-regulation disputes before the National Advertising Division and the National Advertising Review Board. Jeff frequently counsels clients on advertising substantiation issues, anti-counterfeiting strategies, and cybersquatting prevention. He also regularly advises major sports leagues in connection with arbitrations and other confidential matters.
Jeff maintains a robust pro bono immigration practice, assisting clients with asylum and U-Visa applications and in connection with removal proceedings. In addition to his active practice, Jeff is an editor of and contributor to the Firm’s false advertising blog, Watch This Space: Proskauer on Advertising Law.
Subscribe to all posts by Jeff Warshafsky
After the recent dismissal of nearly identical claims, the same consumer plaintiffs have once again been thwarted in their attempt to challenge labeling and advertising that supposedly misleads consumers into believing the product contains white chocolate. Prescott v. Nestle USA, Inc., No. 19-CV-07471-BLF (N.D. Cal. June 4, 2020). Here, the plaintiffs alleged that Nestle’s use … Continue Reading
Last month, the Seventh Circuit reversed a district court’s decision preliminarily enjoining Anheuser-Busch from making various advertising claims related to the absence of corn syrup in Bud Light, including that Bud Light has “no corn syrup,” that Molson Coors’s competing Miller Lite and Coors Lite beers are “made with” or “brewed with” corn syrup, and … Continue Reading
On April 8, 2020, Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Ghirardelli Chocolate’s motion to dismiss a putative nationwide class action brought by several consumers who alleged Ghirardelli deceptively marketed its “premium classic white” baking chips as containing white chocolate. Cheslow v. Ghirardelli Chocolate, No. 19-CV-07467-PJH, … Continue Reading
Last month, a Fifth Circuit panel vacated in part a judgment in a false advertising case that disgorged the defendant’s profits, awarded corrective advertising damages under the Lanham Act and enjoined the disputed claims. Illinois Tool Works v. Rust-Oleum, 955 F.3d 512 (5th Cir. 2020). The panel held that the plaintiff failed to show the … Continue Reading
A Second Circuit panel recently affirmed the dismissal of a putative false advertising class action against Dunkin’ Brands, which alleged the company misled consumers as to the contents of products Dunkin’ described as “Angus steak.” Chen v. Dunkin’ Brands, 18-cv-3087 (2d Cir. Mar. 31, 2020). The complaint asserted claims under various state consumer protection laws, … Continue Reading
National Beverage Corporation, the maker of the popular LaCroix sparkling water products, failed to obtain Rule 11 sanctions against a consumer plaintiff, but ultimately scored a major victory recently, when the plaintiff not only withdrew her lawsuit, but also took the remarkable step of publicly retracting her claims alleging that LaCroix “all natural” and “100% … Continue Reading
Judge Vernon Broderick of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently decided a motion to dismiss by luxury consignment goods reseller The RealReal (“TRR”) in an action brought by famous French brand Chanel. Chanel v. The Realreal, 2020 WL 1503422 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2020). In addition to the false advertising … Continue Reading
On February 6, the California Court of Appeals (Second Appellate District) sustained a lower court’s dismissal of a putative class action alleging that the claim “no sugar added” on the label of tangerine juice is deceptive because it falsely implies that competing products do contain added sugar. Schaeffer v. Califia Farms, BC654207 (Cal. App. 2d … Continue Reading
On January 31, 2020, Southern District of New York Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied Plaintiff Matthew Marotto’s motion for reconsideration of an order denying class certification in his lawsuit against Pringles potato chip maker Kellogg over allegedly misleading labeling of Pringles cans. Marotto v. Kellogg, No. 1:18-cv-03545 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2020).… Continue Reading
Last summer, we covered the Supreme Court’s decision to grant certiorari in Romag Fasteners v. Fossil in order to decide whether § 1117(a) of the Lanham Act requires that a plaintiff make a showing of willfulness in order to obtain a trademark infringement defendant’s profits for a violation of § 1125(a). As we noted in … Continue Reading
The Association of National Advertisers and the Brand Activation Association will be hosting their 41st annual Marketing Law Conference at the Marriott Marquis in San Diego, CA from November 4-6. Proskauer is a sponsor of the conference, and will be speaking on two separate panels. Lawrence Weinstein, the co-chair of Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group and … Continue Reading
We have previously written about decisions addressing food product labels, and the messages that these labels convey about the products’ ingredients. In Jessani v. Monini, the Second Circuit found that a product label for “white truffle flavored” olive oil did not imply that the product contained actual white truffles. Not long afterwards, the Second Circuit … Continue Reading
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. to decide whether a showing of willfulness is necessary to obtain a defendant’s profits under the Lanham Act. In Romag, the plaintiff, a manufacturer of magnetic snap fasteners, sued Fossil and various retailers for, among other things, infringement … Continue Reading
Several months ago we covered two Second Circuit decisions that addressed false advertising claims related to ingredients and product labeling of foods, which reached differing results. Applying similar principles, a recent decision from the Southern District of California found that Starbucks’ packaging for its sour gummy candies did not reasonably suggest that the candies were … Continue Reading
After Ninth Circuit review, it remains to be seen whether a nutritional supplement maker can claim that ginkgo biloba leaf extract and vinpocetine supplements improve “alertness,” “mental clarity, and memory” in the face of contradictory scientific studies. In Korolshteyn v. Costco Wholesale, No. 17-56435 (2019), the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court order granting summary judgment in favor … Continue Reading
In a battle of leading yogurt beverage makers, Chief Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently denied Dannon’s application for a preliminary injunction in its false advertising suit against Chobani. The result of Judge McMahon’s decision is that Chobani can continue to sell its yogurt drinks … Continue Reading
On November 13, 2018, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the amount of deference a federal court is required to give the Federal Communications Commission in determining what constitutes an unsolicited advertisement within the meaning of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). PDR Network v. Carlton & Harris, No. 17-1705. The case is scheduled for … Continue Reading
On December 10, 2018, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Kimberly-Clark Corp, v. Davidson, No. 18-304 (2018), in which Kimberly-Clark sought to overturn a controversial Ninth Circuit decision allowing a plaintiff in a false advertising case to seek injunctive relief on behalf of an alleged consumer class notwithstanding that plaintiff’s complaint acknowledged she was aware … Continue Reading
On December 20, 2018, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal without leave to amend of a putative class action complaint against Blue Diamond Growers, which alleged that the term “almond milk” on Blue Diamond’s beverages was misleading. Painter v. Blue Diamond Growers, — Fed.Appx. —, 2018 WL 6720560 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2018). The named … Continue Reading
We recently blogged about the Second Circuit’s December 3, 2018 decision in Jessani v. Monini, where, applying the reasonable consumer standard, the Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of a complaint alleging that the label of an extra virgin olive oil product advertised as “truffle flavored” falsely implied that the product contained … Continue Reading
On December 4, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit partially reversed the dismissal of Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals’ suit against HBS International Corp. for alleged violations of the Lanham Act and Georgia’s Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HBS International Corp., No. 17-13884 (11th Cir. 2018). Hi-Tech alleged that the label of HBS’s protein-powder supplement – … Continue Reading
Earlier this year, we covered a decision from the District of Connecticut finding state law false advertising claims against the bottled water company Poland Spring preempted by the FDCA. Flowing from that decision is the case we are covering today: Frompovicz v. Niagara Bottling, LLC, 2018 WL 4465879 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 18, 2018).… Continue Reading
Last fall, we covered the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of Board-Tech Electronic Company’s Lanham Act false advertising claim. Based on its own internal testing, Board-Tech alleged that light switches sold by its competitor, Eaton Corporation, were falsely labeled as complying with an Underwriters Laboratories (“UL”) certification standard. However, the district court found that … Continue Reading
Recently, a plaintiff’s purported class action against Diet Dr. Pepper went flat when a California federal judge held that the term “Diet” alone on a soft drink label does not constitute a claim that the soft drink will assist in weight loss. In Becerra v. Dr. Pepper/Seven Up, Inc., Plaintiff Shana Becerra brought a putative … Continue Reading
No “White” Lie: Plaintiffs Fail to Show Reasonable Consumer Would Expect “White Morsels” to Contain White Chocolate
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Eric Wertheim on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Seventh Circuit Cans District Court Injunction in Beer Brands Corn Syrup Suit
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Carl Mazurek on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Judge Dismisses Half-Baked False Advertising Claims Against Ghirardelli
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Marc Palmer on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Fifth Circuit Rains on Plaintiff’s Parade, Vacates Award in Dispute over Windshield Water Repellant Ad
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Carl Mazurek on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Lanham Act
Second Circuit Finds Consumer Suit Against Dunkin’ Not Well Done
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Emily H. Kline on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices
La Croix Loses Rule 11 Battle but Wins War, as Plaintiff Retracts Lawsuit Allegations
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Eric Wertheim on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
The RealReal Falls Seven Bags Short of 100% Compliance with Advertising Claims
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Kelly Landers Hawthorne on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Lanham Act
Beverage Mislabeling Suit Runs Out of Juice
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Carl Mazurek on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
The Fun Did Stop for Pringles False Advertising Class Action
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Emily H. Kline on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Update on Oral Argument in Romag: Supreme Court Considers Whether Willfulness is Required to Disgorge a Defendant’s Profits under the Lanham Act
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Carl Mazurek on Posted in Lanham Act
Proskauer in San Diego at the 41st Annual ANA/BAA Marketing Law Conference
By Lawrence Weinstein, Alexander Kaplan, Jeff Warshafsky and Jennifer Yang on Posted in Events and Announcements
Plaintiff Fails to Butter Up Court with Mashed Potato Suit
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Carl Mazurek on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
SCOTUS to Decide Whether the Lanham Act Requires Proof of Willfulness for Disgorgement of Profits
By Lawrence Weinstein, Alexander Kaplan, Jeff Warshafsky and Monique Curry on Posted in Lanham Act
California Court Sours on Starbucks Gummies Lawsuit
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Ariella Muller on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Ninth Circuit Sends Brain-Booster Claim Case Back to District Court
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Eric Wertheim on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices
SDNY Judge Not Sweet on Dannon’s Bid for a Preliminary Injunction
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Emily H. Kline on Posted in Deceptive Trade Practices, Injunctions, Lanham Act
SCOTUS to Decide If Courts Must Defer to the FCC’s Interpretation of “Unsolicited Advertisements” under the TCPA
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Monique Curry on Posted in Regulatory
Kimberly-Clark Unable to Flush Wet Wipes Case
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Aliza Hassine on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
No Use Crying Over Spilled (Almond) Milk: Ninth Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Almond Milk Labeling Suit
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Anisha Shenai-Khatkhate on Posted in Class Actions, FDCA, Labeling Claims, Primary Jurisdiction/Preemption, Typicality Requirement
Cheez-Its Class Action Revived in “Whole” by Second Circuit
By Lawrence Weinstein and Jeff Warshafsky on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
Eleventh Circuit Works Out Preclusion and Preemption Issues in Protein Powder Dispute
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Emily H. Kline on Posted in Labeling Claims, Lanham Act, Primary Jurisdiction/Preemption
District Court Filters Out Preempted “Spring Water” False Advertising Claim
By Alexander Kaplan and Jeff Warshafsky on Posted in Lanham Act
Update: Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Lanham Act Claims Based on Allegedly False UL Certification
By Alexander Kaplan and Jeff Warshafsky on Posted in Lanham Act
Diet Soda Lawsuit Fizzles Out
By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeff Warshafsky and Russell Kostelak on Posted in Class Actions, Deceptive Trade Practices, Labeling Claims
