article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

Dawgs’ (“Dawgs”) counterclaim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. In 2016, Dawgs added new asserted counterclaims against Crocs, including a claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The briefs also discuss, to a limited extend, patent law’s false marking statute, 35 U.S.C. §

article thumbnail

court remands NYC's false advertising case against oil companies to state court

43(B)log

Here, the city successfully wins remand (and a fee award) in this opinion rejecting removal of its false advertising suit against Exxon, other fossil fuel companies, and their top trade association for violations of New York City’s Consumer Protection Law. Following a similar case, Connecticut v. Exxon Mobil Corp.,

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Unearthing the Truth: How Ambiguity Excavated a Win in False Advertising Claim

JD Supra Law

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit was tasked with excavating the truth behind claims of false advertising and copyright infringement. In a case that pitted two sellers of construction equipment against each other — I Dig Texas, LLC v. Creager — the U.S.

article thumbnail

plaintiff has standing to seek injunctive relief against allegedly falsely advertised penile implant

43(B)log

Also, in “other cases, the threat of future harm may be the consumer’s plausible allegations that she might purchase the product in the future, despite the fact it was once marred by false advertising or labeling, as she may reasonably, but incorrectly, assume the product was improved.”

article thumbnail

False advertising and TM infringement receive very different damages treatment: case in point

43(B)log

17, 2023) Another entry in the “courts treat Lanham Act false advertising very differently than Lanham Act trademark infringement, despite identical damages provisions” line. CareDx sued Natera for false advertising. Natera, Inc., 19-662-CFC, 2023 WL 4561059 (D. Natera made superiority claims for its Prospera.

article thumbnail

Retailer has standing to assert Lanham Act false advertising claims against its own supplier

43(B)log

Unsurprisingly, fraudulent inducement, common-law fraud, and negligent inducement claims survived. the Lanham Act false advertising claim survived. Even if that weren’t true, the plaintiff would have standing under the Lanham Act because it lost sales as a result of the Lynd defendants’ false advertising.

article thumbnail

no disgorgement under state law when false advertising wasn't shown to result in sales

43(B)log

Republic alleged that HBI, its competitor in the tobacco rolling paper industry, engaged in false advertising under the Lanham Act, unfair competition, and violations of the IUDTPA. But IUDTPA remedies are additional to any other remedies available against the same conduct under the common law. There was no special verdict form.