2021 Copying False Advertising Trademark 
43(B)log
OCTOBER 4, 2021
Vining, 2021 WL 4344891, No. Defendants' letter allegedly copied text from LStar Trademark infringement: LStar never specified what its trademarks or service marks were. LStar didn’t plead its own trademark use. LStar Development Gp., 5:20-CV-184-FL (E.D.N.C. Not every word on a label or ad is a mark.
43(B)log
AUGUST 9, 2021
2021) Plaintiffs/Debtors argued, and the court held in relevant part, that defendants (Charter) breached the automatic stay by a literally false and intentionally misleading advertising campaign to induce the Debtors’ customers to terminate their agreements with the Debtors by telling them that bankruptcy risked impairment of their service.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
43(B)log
SEPTEMBER 20, 2021
2021 WL 2270511, No. 3, 2021) The parties compete in the market for custom landscape design services. “[I]n Each webpage that contained one of McCleese’s photos also contained Natorp’s own trademark and copyright symbols at the top and bottom. Along with copyright claims, McCleese asserted Lanham Act false advertising claims.
Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation Blog
MAY 15, 2021
May 7, 2021), the Court granted Natera’s motion to exclude at trial the opinions of CareDx’s damages expert relating to “corrective advertising damages.” CareDx’s Lanham Act claims were based on allegations that Natera falsely represented that Natera’s Prospera kidney transplant test is superior to CareDx’s Allosure Kidney test.
43(B)log
MARCH 6, 2024
1, 2024) NYU Langone sued Northwell for trade dress infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin, and false advertising under the Lanham Act, as well as related claims under the New York GBL and New York common law. The court dismissed the complaint—the false advertising claims with prejudice.
Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation Blog
NOVEMBER 7, 2021
November 5, 2021), the Court granted the motion for partial summary judgment of Plaintiff Emerson Radio Corp. as to the affirmative defenses of laches, acquiescence, and statute of limitations of Defendants as to Defendants’ allegedly infringing use of the EMERSON QUIET KOOL trademark. A copy of the Memorandum Order is attached.
43(B)log
SEPTEMBER 7, 2021
2021 WL 1534988, No. The claim for cancellation of the ‘675 Mark was based on fraud in obtaining the trademark registration and misrepresentation of source, whereas their claim for cancellation of the ’549 and ’077 Marks was based on misrepresentation of source alone. Tapestry, Inc. Chunma USA, Inc., 20-CV-0271 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
59 
Let's personalize your content