Lexmark

News & Analysis as of

Federal Circuit to Consider International Patent Exhaustion En Banc - Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sua sponte ordered an en banc hearing to consider the issue of international patent exhaustion. Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc., Case No. 14-1617...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - April 2015

Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc. (No. 2012-1289, 4/27/15) (Newman, Schall, Wallach) - April 27, 2015 11:12 AM. Wallach, J. On remand from the Supreme Court, reversing district court summary judgment...more

IP Newsflash - April 2015 #2

Federal Circuit Decides Sua Sponte To Consider Patent Exhaustion Issues En Banc - On April 14, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential order pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 35(a) ordering that the pending appeal in...more

October 2014: Trademark Litigation Update

Supreme Court Opens the Door to More False Advertising Claims. In a unanimous decision, Lexmark International Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1377 (2014), the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff...more

The Supreme Court Resolves a Circuit Split Regarding Standing to Sue for False Advertising Under the Lanham Act

In Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (March 25, 2014), the Supreme Court unanimously held that "to invoke the Lanham Act’s cause of action for false advertising, a plaintiff must plead (and ultimately...more

Game On: U.S. Supreme Court Relaxes Standards for False Advertising Claims

If a competitor circulates false advertising about your products you can sue under federal law, but what do you do when the person making the false claim is not a competitor? Sue them anyhow....more

Supreme Court Establishes a New Test for False Advertising Standing Under Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lexmark International Inc. v. Static Control Components Inc., holding that a two-prong analysis comprised of the "zone-of-interests" test and a "proximate-cause"...more

U.S. Supreme Court Expands Scope of Potential Plaintiffs in Lanham Act False Advertising Claims – No Longer Limited to Actual...

One of the several claims available to plaintiffs under the Lanham Act is a claim for “false advertising.” Section 1125(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act states that... (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or...more

MarkIt to Market - April 2014

The April issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to MarketTM newsletter contains a cautionary tale regarding use of social media, a clarified test for false advertising standing, updates to Canada's Trade-marks Act, and an updated...more

The Supreme Court Redefines Standing Test for Lanham Act False Advertising Claims

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court clarified the standing requirements for false advertising claims brought under the Lanham Act. In Lexmark Intl., Inc. v. Static Control Components Inc., 572 U.S. ___ (2014), the Court, in...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

Orrick's Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - April 2014

Shanghai High People’s Court Rules That Resale Price Maintenance Agreement Constitutes Monopolistic Agreement - The Shanghai High People’s Court recently made available its Aug. 1, 2013 final judgment overruling the...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

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

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 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

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Standing Requirements for Lanham Act False Advertising Claim

A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held Tuesday that a plaintiff may bring a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), even where the plaintiff is not a direct competitor of the defendant. A false...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

U.S. Supreme Court Standardizes Standing Analysis for False-Advertising Claims Under the Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court held that false-advertising claims brought under the Lanham Act are not limited to direct competitors of the allegedly false advertiser. Instead, the Act authorizes any person to bring an...more

34 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×