In an important recent false advertising decision in a suit brought by home pregnancy test manufacturer Church & Dwight against its principal competitor SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, a Second Circuit panel unanimously affirmed orders by Judge Alison Nathan of the Southern District of New York, following a bench trial on liability, (i) holding that SPD … Continue Reading
On May 10, 2016, Judge Joseph F. Leeson, Jr. of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment on false advertising and trademark claims in favor of defendant Tyson Foods, Inc. and a subsidiary, the makers of “Park’s Finest” frankfurters. The decision illustrates important distinctions between two causes of action—trademark infringement and false advertising—both covered … Continue Reading
By Alexander Kaplan and Evelyn Pang on Posted in Lanham Act
Last week, an appellate court held that a plaintiff has standing to bring a false association and false advertising claim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, even though it did not use its mark or sell its competing product in the United States. In Belmora LLC v. Bayer Consumer Care AG, a Fourth Circuit … Continue Reading
Alex Kaplan was one of three panelists speaking at the Knowledge Congress’ webcast “Irreparable Harm and Trademark Law Demystified! A 2015 Perspective LIVE Webcast” This event was scheduled for Thursday, October 1, 2015 @ 12:00pm-2:00pm ET. Complimentary passes were available for the first 30 registrants courtesy of Proskauer at https://gkc.memberclicks.net/index.php?option=com_mc&view=mc&mcid=form_199984. The event synopsis is below: … Continue Reading
A lawsuit between Procter & Gamble (“P&G”) and Hello Products (“Hello”) – a toothpaste start up that promotes its products as “naturally friendly” – settled last week with the entry of a stipulated injunction, but Hello might still have reason to smile. Days before the settlement, the Southern District of New York rejected P&G’s motion … Continue Reading
Nordstrom Rack has recently found itself at the center of an unwelcome suit over its labeling practices. Nordstrom Rack discloses the savings it offers customers by placing “compare at” labels on its price tags which show two prices: the “compare at” price and a lower, actual sale price. A recent class action filed in the … Continue Reading
The District Court of Maine recently provided a reminder that – even in the post-Lexmark world of Lanham Act false advertising standing – Article III standing requirements can still impose a meaningful barrier on plaintiffs. On March 18, 2015, District of Maine Judge George Z. Singal dismissed Maine Springs, LLC’s complaint against Nestle Waters North … Continue Reading
Art is no stranger to great controversy, although the arbiters of art world disputes are usually critics and artists rather than federal judges. Nevertheless, in early March, Judge Denise Cote of the Southern District of New York was faced with a complaint accusing the Keith Haring Foundation of a range of violations – including antitrust, … Continue Reading
While courts may not officially be in the business of ghostbusting, a district court in California recently offered some support to a blender manufacturer apparently haunted by a phantom reviewer. The court found that negative internet reviews posted by the shadowy “Chris W” – who is allegedly a front for a competitor – can suffice … Continue Reading
The Third Circuit has rendered a notable decision with important implications for the use of fine print in advertising. The Court held that small print statements that explicitly define the terms of a more prominent superior performance claim can render that performance claim unambiguous – and thus subject to a literal falsity claim – even if … Continue Reading
On July 29, the Second Circuit clarified its view that, in a two-player market, willfully deceptive advertising – even non-comparative advertising – creates a legal presumption of consumer confusion and injury, applicable to determination of both liability and damages. This emphatic opinion makes plain the peril that follows a finding that defendant willfully engaged in … Continue Reading
On July 2, 2014 Judge Vince Chhabria dismissed a class action alleging that Hain Celestial Group, a manufacturer of “raw” juices, misleadingly labelled and advertised its wares. This dismissal is noteworthy – and should stand as a cautionary tale – because the class plaintiffs eviscerated their own claims and pleaded themselves out of court by … Continue Reading
Imagine this scenario: you’re a toothpaste start-up with six employees. You’re about to launch your new brand into an oral care market dominated by consumer products giants like Procter & Gamble (“P&G”) (the maker of Crest and Oral B products), and a federal judge has just enjoined you from selling or shipping 100,000 units of … Continue Reading
This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.
