Remove 2006 Remove Advertising Remove False Advertising Remove Patent Infringement
article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit is set to consider the use of terms like “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive” in commercial advertising can be actionable under § 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act when their use is not entirely accurate. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions.

article thumbnail

Don’t call a Rule 68 judgment in an infringement case an infringement judgment

LexBlog IP

Here, Crocs sued defendants in 2006. Defendant Diamond Distribution then sued Crocs for defamation, false advertising, and related state torts. The holding, at 12(b)(6); The Court finds that the complaint plausibly establishes that the press release contains materially false statements. . Crocs moved to dismiss.

article thumbnail

Fish & Richardson Elevates 17 Attorneys to Principal 

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

Newly promoted principals for 2022 are: Michael Ballanco focuses his practice on all aspects of patent infringement matters at the trial and appellate level. with high honors in biological science from Tsinghua University in 2006. “They enrich our workplace and add enormous value to our client work.”. He received his J.D.,