FDCA Preclusion: When Can a Manufacturer Defeat a Competitor’s Lawsuit by Complying with FDA Regulations?

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

As many readers probably know, when a food or beverage manufacturer gets a consumer class action alleging that its labeling violated state law, one of the first things it should do is consider whether the disputed aspect of the labeling is covered by the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”).  Many provisions of that statute—and, by extension, their implementing regulations—expressly preempt non-identical state-law regulations.  If a putative class of consumers is asking a manufacturer to do something different with its labeling than those provisions do, there is a strong argument that the case is preempted:  federal law (the FDCA) trumps state law (the relevant consumer protection statute).

In some instances, however, the FDCA also trumps other federal law, a mechanism known as preclusion.  Until somewhat recently, the preclusion doctrine held that a food or beverage company could avoid any Lanham Act false-advertising claim by proving its compliance with FDA labeling regulations.  The reasoning went that in addition to its public safety mission, the FDA is charged with acting when a food’s “labeling is false or misleading.”  21 U.S.C. § 343(a)(1).  So, when the FDA says how manufacturers should label their products, those regulations represent the agency’s “considered” decision regarding what does—and does not—mislead consumers.  POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 679 F.3d 1170, 1177 (9th Cir. 2012), rev’d, 573 U.S. 102 (2014).  And were a court to override that decision, it would “undercut[] the FDA’s expert judgments and authority.”  Id.  In other words, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and its regulations “precluded” inconsistent Lanham Act claims—just as the FDCA and its regulations may “preempt” certain inconsistent state-law claims.

At first glance, the Supreme Court’s decision in Pom appeared to put an end to this “preclusion” defense, full stop.  In reversing the Ninth Circuit, after all, it stated that “Congress did not intend the FDCA to preclude Lanham Act suits.”  573 U.S. at 121.  But, as has become clear in the five years since Pom, FDCA preclusion lives on.  In particular, some courts have recognized at least two areas where Lanham Act claims are still precluded by the FDCA: (1) where a plaintiff challenges a specific label that the agency has reviewed and pre-approved, and (2) where a plaintiff’s theory of liability would require the courts to interpret the FDCA when the FDA itself has not yet done so.  And even absent preclusion, courts have routinely found that compliance with applicable FDA regulations is persuasive evidence that a label is not misleading.

POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.

But back to the beginning.  The dramatis personae in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola Co. were two competing juice manufacturers, both of which sold pomegranate juice blends.  Pom Wonderful argued that Coca-Cola’s statement of identity for its juice—which was clearly permitted by the FDCA—nonetheless had to be changed, because it was supposedly misleading to consumers.   Coca-Cola raised a preclusion defense, arguing that a private competitor could not impose requirements on its labeling that the FDCA did not.  At summary judgment, the Central District of California and then the Ninth Circuit agreed with Coca-Cola. 

The Supreme Court did not.  Writing for the Court, Justice Kennedy held that Congress did not intend the FDCA to preclude Lanham Act suits like POM’s.  POM Wonderful, 573 U.S. at 121.  The Court noted that “neither the Lanham Act nor the FDCA, in express terms, forbids limits Lanham Act claims challenging labels that are regulated by the FDCA.”  Id. at 113.  And while the FDCA has an explicit preemption clause that bars certain state-law claims, Congress “did not enact a provision addressing the preclusion of other federal law” such as the Lanham Act.  Id. at 114.  The Court also believed that the two statutes’ general purposes were distinct and complementary:  the Lanham Act is concerned with competitors’ commercial interests, while the FDCA is primary concerned with “public health and safety.”  Id. at 115. 

But we can’t help but tell the ending of this story: Coca-Cola prevailed on remand, after a jury determined that its labeling was neither false nor misleading.

At first blush, the Supreme Court’s holding in Pom looks simple: Compliance with FDA regulations is no defense to false advertising claims under the Lanham Act.  But since Pom, it has become clear that FDCA preclusion is not dead.  Manufacturers have successfully invoked FDCA compliance to defeat Lanham Act suits, particularly where the dispute labeling (1) is explicitly approved by the FDA; or (2) is the subject of ongoing FDA interpretation.  Moreover, even when the FDCA and its regulations do not preclude a suit outright, manufacturers can often point to regulatory compliance as evidence that its labeling is not in fact false or misleading.

Pre-Approved Labels

The Supreme Court left an opening in Pom Wonderful by recognizing that not all regulatory compliance is created equal.  Justice Kennedy explained that for foods and beverages, the “FDA does not preapprove . . . labels under [its] regulations.” That, the Court noted, “contrasts with the FDA’s regulation of other types of labels, such as drug labels, and is consistent with the less extensive role the FDA plays in the regulation of food than in the regulation of drugs.”  Id. at 109. 

The Court was referring to the fact that medical devices and drugs, along with their labels, must be expressly approved by the FDA before they make it to market—whether through the section 510(k), New Drug Application, or another route.  And, once approved, a manufacturer generally cannot change its product’s label without FDA sign-off.  For example, for devices approved through the 510(k) route—reserved for medical devices that are substantially similar to previously approved ones—the manufacturer cannot change the labeling of its product without prior FDA sign off.  E.g., 21 C.F.R. § 807.81(a)(3).  The FDA is yet more demanding for generic drugs:  no generic drug label may deviate in any way from its brand-name counterpart absent permission from the FDA.  PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 564 U.S. 604, 615 (2011).  By contrast, although food and beverage manufacturers must comply with the FDCA and its regulations, in most instances they do not need the FDA to sign off on their labels before products can go to market. 

This difference matters in the false advertising context.  When a plaintiff alleges that a drug or device manufacturer’s labeling is false or misleading, enforcing the Lanham Act would put the defendant in a lose-lose situation:  Face a private lawsuit or disobey explicit FDA instructions.  For that reason, the leading Lanham Act treatise explained in those situations, there “is a direct conflict between a clear mandate of the FDCA regulations and Lanham Act enforcement.”  5 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 27.65:50 (5th ed. 2015).  And at least some courts have started to reach the same conclusion.  See JHP Pharms., LLC v. Hospira, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 3d 992, 1000 & n.5 (C.D. Cal. 2014) (the “presumption” after Pom is that Lanham Act claims are not precluded “unless” the FDA “pre-approved a particular labeling scheme”); G&W Labs., Inc. v. Laser Pharm., LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102132, at *47 (D.N.J. June 19, 2018) (similar); Par Sterile Prods., LLC v. Fresenius Kabi USA LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32409, at *13 n.5 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 17, 2015) (similar).

The Second Circuit, at least at first, reached the same conclusion for drug and device labels.  A year after the Pom decision, the court considered “whether representations that are wholly consistent with an FDA[-approved drug] label are subject to Lanham Act liability.”  Apotex Inc. v. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc., 823 F.3d 51, 64 (2d Cir. 2016).  The answer, the Second Circuit held, was “no.”  Advertisements and “representations commensurate with information in an FDA label generally cannot form the basis for Lanham Act liability.”  Id.  (emphasis added)  Although the Second Circuit has issued one subsequent decision in tension with that holding, its efforts to reconcile the later decision with Apotex was confusing, to say the least. 

The bottom line here is that Pom appeared to leave open a preclusion defense to the Lanham Act when the FDA pre-approves, and requires a manufacturer to use, specific labeling language.  At least some courts have also started to reach that conclusion.  And we think that makes intuitive sense:  Drug and device manufacturers must receive FDA sign-off for their product labels, and cannot change them without further regulatory review.  That should preclude Lanham Act suits urging the manufacturers to change those same labels, in violation of the regulatory scheme.

Pseudo Primary Jurisdiction

Separate from preclusion, many courts have recognized that, notwithstanding Pom, plaintiffs cannot use the Lanham Act to interfere with FDA’s rulemaking authority.  Unlike the typical primary jurisdiction case—where courts stay a case pending the resolution of an issue within the special competence of an administrative agency—courts have dismissed outright Lanham Act claims that bypass “FDA’s exclusive enforcement authority by seeking to prove that Defendants violated the FDCA, when the FDA did not reach that conclusion.”  PhotoMedex, Inc. v. Irwin, 601 F.3d 919, 928 (9th Cir. 2010).  PhotoMedex, although decided before Pom, is illustrative.  There, the defendant modified its medical device, and the plaintiff sued under the Lanham Act.  According to the plaintiff, the defendant’s changes to device were big enough that it no longer should have advertised its device as “FDA approved.”

The Ninth Circuit dismissed the claim, reasoning that the FDA alone has “the responsibility for taking enforcement action” when a company mispresents whether its product was cleared by the FDA.  Id.   Allowing the claim to proceed, the Ninth Circuit explained, would “would, in effect, permit’ the defendant “to assume enforcement power which” the FDCA “does not allow and require the finder of fact to make a decision that the FDA itself did not make.”  Id. at 30.

Although the precedential value of PhotoMedex is a tad murky after Pom, see ThermoLife Int'l, LLC v. Gaspari Nutrition Inc., 648 F. App'x 609, 612 (9th Cir. 2016), courts still follow its reasoning.  Most recently, in Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. ITC, the plaintiff alleged that its competitors were improperly selling pills as “dietary supplements,” when the products were in fact “new drugs.”  923 F.3d 959, 961 (Fed. Cir. 2019).  And like in PhotoMedex, the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims, because “the FDA ha[d] not provided guidance as to whether the products at issue in this case should be considered ‘new drugs’ that require approval.”  Id. at 968. 

Other federal courts have followed the same path.  See, e.g., Kurin, Inc. v. Magnolia Med. Techs., Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184382, at *8 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2019) (dismissing Lanham Act claim that defendant’s device was misclassified); JHP Pharm., Ltd. Liab. Co. v. Hospira, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 3d 992, 1005 (C.D. Cal. 2014) (dismissing Lanham Act claim challenging the legality of the defendant’s product under FDA regs).  As they should.  Unlike in Pom, the theory of these plaintiffs’ claims turns on whether a company violated an ambiguous FDA (or some other agency’s) regulation.  Allowing plaintiffs to shoehorn a question of regulatory compliance into the Lanham Act would require judges to make a “preemptive determination of how the FDA would interpret and enforce its own regulations.”  Amarin Pharma, 923 F.3d at 967.

“Preclusion Lite”: Regulatory Compliance as Evidence of Non-Falsity

Even when outright preclusion is not on the table, courts have recognized that FDA compliance provides persuasive evidence that advertising is not misleading.  After all, the FDA’s regulations are intended not just to protect consumer health and safety, but also to prevent false or misleading representations to the public.  And those regulations are the product of both the agency’s expertise and input from industry, consumer groups, and other interested parties via the notice-and-comment process.

For that reason, notwithstanding Pom, courts still give weight to manufacturers’ compliance with FDCA labeling and marketing regulations.  See, e.g., Ivie v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25615, at *35-36 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2013) (finding FDA guidance “relevant to the issue of whether these labels could be deceptive or misleading to a reasonable consumer”); Bohac v. Gen. Mills, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147530, at *10-11 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2013) (“Of course, the FDA’s views are relevant to the issue of whether these labels could be deceptive or misleading to a reasonable consumer but they are not the sole or dispositive factor.”).

That is equally true when courts must determine whether an advertiser’s claims have scientific support.  Maybe even more so than when interpreting a label, the FDA often has unique expertise in assessing the scientific validity of manufacturer’s claims.  See Sugar Ass'n v. McNeil-PPC, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89487, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 2008) (recognizing the relevance of the FDA’s approval of sucralose’s safety); SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, L.P. v. Johnson & Johnson-Merck Consumer Pharm. Co., 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7257, at *41 (S.D.N.Y. May 24, 1996) (deferring to FDA’s conclusion that over-the-counter medication worked as intended).

It’s important to remember, though, that FDA compliance cuts both ways.  Failure to follow FDA labeling and advertising guidance, or ignoring an FDA scientific opinion, can be used against defendants in Lanham Act actions.  For example, in Eli Lilly & Co. v. Arla Foods, Inc., 893 F.3d 375 (7th Cir. 2018), the Seventh Circuit relied on the FDA’s regulatory guidance (not even a final rule) when finding a defendant’s advertisement about its cheese misleading.  Id. at 383-84.  And courts have relied on FDA’s scientific conclusion when finding an advertiser’s efficacy claims false.  E.g., Zeneca, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10852, at *97 (S.D.N.Y. July 15, 1999).  Whether preclusive or not, a company’s FDA (non)compliance will remain a vital piece of evidence in any false-advertising action.

*  *  *

Pom Wonderful meant the end of a strong FDA preclusion defense in Lanham Act cases, at least for food and beverage manufacturers.  But the FDA’s—or other agencies’—opinions still matter.  For drug and medical device manufacturers, courts have recognized that FDA’s preapproval of a label should be dipositive to a Lanham Act claim.  And courts have been cautious, notwithstanding Pom, letting plaintiffs use unclear FDA regulations as the starting point for their Lanham Act claims.  Finally, even where an agency’s regulations are not case determinative, courts often rely on the FDA’s expert opinion in deciding whether an ad is false or misleading.  All in all, compliance with the FDCA and its regulations can still be very useful to a manufacturer defending against a competitor suit, even if it is not always a silver bullet.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at privacy@jdsupra.com.

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com. We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our Privacy Policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit legal.hubspot.com/privacy-policy.
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit www.newrelic.com/privacy.
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit www.google.com/policies. To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout. This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit http://www.aboutcookies.org which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.