False Advertising

News & Analysis as of

Beretta, (No) Thank You Very Much . . . .

Apparently Elvis Presley was a well-known Beretta gun owner during his life, so I suppose his lips might have uttered the words “Beretta, thank you very much.” The King’s estate, however, isn’t thankful about an Elvis-themed...more

Pom Wonderful and Consumer Class Actions Under State Law

The newest wave of false advertising consumer class actions asserts that consumer labeling or marketing violates state unfair competition laws by confusing (or potentially confusing) consumers. While brought under state...more

Car Manufacturer and Ad Agency Settle False-Advertising Claims for “Hill Climb” Ad

In a 2011 commercial for the Nissan Frontier produced by advertising agency TBWA Worldwide, Inc., the audience sees the wheels of an elaborately designed dune buggy spinning and kicking up sand in a fruitless attempt to climb...more

Sweet(ener) Confusion: Court Divide Over Role of Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine in “Evaporated Cane Juice” Cases Grows

In Swearingen v. Santa Cruz Natural, Inc., No. C 13-04291 (N.D. Cal. April 2, 2014), Judge Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the primary...more

A Uniform Approach to Standing for False Advertising Claims under the Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court, in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 572 U.S. ___ (2014), resolved a circuit split regarding the test for standing to assert a claim for false advertising...more

Supreme Court Inks Uniform Standing Test for Lanham Act False Advertising Claims

Key Takeaways - - The US Supreme Court created a uniform test for standing for false advertising claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, resolving a three-way circuit split. - The new standing test...more

Food and Beverage News and Trends - April 2014

This regular publication by DLA Piper lawyers focuses on helping clients navigate the ever-changing business, legal and regulatory landscape. - Food industry opposes trans fat bar, proposes setting limitations. Major...more

Advertising Law

SPECIAL FOCUS: Supreme Court Adopts Broad Standing Test for False Advertising Plaintiffs - On March 25th, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion regarding the test for standing in false advertising cases...more

SCOTUS Clears District Court Jam Over Test for Standing in False Advertising Cases

Printing has not been this interesting since Dwight Schrute and Jim Halpert bickered over paper sales and Michael Scott told off-color jokes in “The Office.” Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court stepped into the laser...more

The Supreme Court Redefines Standing Requirements for False Advertising Claims

On March 25, 2014, Justice Antonin Scalia authored an opinion for a unanimous United States Supreme Court in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., case number 12-873, setting forth a bright-line test...more

Proposition 65 Hot Button Issue: Caramel Coloring in Soft Drinks

Beverage companies PepsiCo and Goya face a spate of class action lawsuits relating to the caramel coloring in their soda drinks. In January, Consumer Reports, an independent product testing organization, released a report...more

California District Court Holds That Named Plaintiff’s Lack Of Credibility On Key Issue Renders Him An Inadequate Class...

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied class certification in a product mislabeling case after holding that named plaintiff lacked credibility on a material issue and, therefore, could not be an...more

Non-Direct Competitors May Sue Under the Lanham Act, Doctrine of Prudential Standing Eliminated

The Supreme Court of the United States swept away the different standards for Lanham Act prudential standing previously applied by the courts of appeals, and expressly discarded the amorphous concept of prudential standing in...more

Supreme Court Rules That A Non-Competitor Has Standing To Assert False Advertising Claims

On March 25, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a company has standing to assert a false advertising claim against a non-competitor under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act if it can "show economic or reputational injury flowing...more

New York Announces Settlements with Six Auto Dealers

Last week, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced settlements with six auto dealers imposing fines ranging from $7,500 to $15,000 for allegedly engaging in deceptive and misleading advertising practices. The...more

Advertising News & Analysis - March 27, 2014

In this issue: - FTC Seeks Comment on Fair Packaging and Labeling Act Rules - Ink Still Drying on Supreme Court's Lexmark Decision - FTC says Weak Disclosures? Special Effects, Too? Nissan's on the Dark...more

Supreme Court Creates New Standing Test For Asserting False Action Claim Under Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Scalia, in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. In a previous post, I discussed my involvement in this case at...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Standing For False Advertising Claims Under The Lanham Act

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, in the case of Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., ___ S.Ct. ___, Case 12-873 (Mar. 25, 2014), settled an open issue regarding the relevant test for...more

U.S. Supreme Court Settles Lanham Act Standing Conflict

On March 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Static Control Components, Inc. had the right to sue Lexmark International Inc. under the Lanham Act’s false advertising prong. In doing so, the Court established a new...more

United States Supreme Court Clarifies What Plaintiffs Have Standing to Sue for False Advertisement Under the Lanham Act – Lexmark...

In a March 25, 2014 decision, the United States Supreme Court clarified what class of plaintiffs have standing to sue for false advertisement under the Lanham Act (codified at 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)). Lexmark sells the...more

Litigation Alert: Supreme Court’s Lexmark Decision Creates Uniform Federal False Advertising Standing Requirement

On March 25, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lexmark International v. Static Control Components, ruling that Static Control may proceed with its false advertising counterclaim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act...more

Court Refuses Discovery Of Communications With Reinsurers Because Policy Term Was Not Ambiguous

Reinsurance communications were held not discoverable in a commercial coverage dispute. By way of background, PBM Products, LLC sued its competitors, Mead Johnson Nutrition Company and Mead Johnson & Company, for allegedly...more

This Porridge is Just Right: Supreme Court Adopts “Zones of Interest” Standing in False Advertising Cases

When we last posted about Lexmark v. Static Control, we expected that the Supreme Court would endorse one of the circuit court tests to determine whether Static Control, the maker of a chip that facilitates printer cartridge...more

Supreme Court Sets New Test in Lexmark for Whether a Party Has Standing to Bring a False Advertising Claim under the Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., No. 12-873 (Mar. 25, 2014), ruled that a two-part inquiry pairing the zone-of-interests test and a proximate-cause...more

Supreme Court Espouses Standard for False Advertising Standing

The ongoing saga between Lexmark International and Static Control Components was kept alive by the Supreme Court in its March 25, 2014, unanimous decision affirming Static Control’s standing to bring a false advertising claim...more

179 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 8