Tag archives: Lanham Act

Outlaw Labs Can’t Charge Ahead In Suit Against Rhino Sellers

Another chapter in the Outlaw Laboratories litigation drama has ended with another defeat for Outlaw. In 2018 the FDA warned consumers that some “Rhino” products—supplements that compete with Outlaw’s own “male enhancement” supplements—were adulterated with the active ingredients found in prescription drugs like Viagra and Cialis. Outlaw launched a series of false advertising suits against … Continue reading

Trademarks, social media and lessons learned

On June 14, 2018, a federal trial court in New York issued a decision relating to a restaurant owner’s claim that the restaurant manager was using the owner’s trademarks on social media in violation of the federal trademark law known as the Lanham Act. The trial court denied the owner’s claim, in a ruling that … Continue reading

The Slants Win: SCOTUS rules “Disparaging” trademark provision unconstitutional

On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision, holding that the so-called “disparagement clause” of the Lanham Act is an impermissible restriction on free speech under the First Amendment. The ruling is the culmination of years of litigation, and clears the way for Simon Shiao Tam and the Slants to … Continue reading

Update: INTA files amicus brief with SCOTUS in Slants case

On December 16, 2016, the International Trademark Association (“INTA”) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Simon Tam, founder of the Slants. Lee v. Tam, No. 15-1293, Br. Of Amicus Curiae Int’l Trademark Assoc. INTA—a global association comprising more than 7,000 trademark owners and legal practitioners—urged the Court to uphold … Continue reading

Second Circuit may address apparent Apotex/Church & Dwight split

In our September 28, 2016 blog post, and subsequent Law360 Article, we reported that an internal Second-Circuit split had arisen regarding the deference owed to allegedly false and misleading pharmaceutical/medical device advertising where the FDA had considered and approved similar claims for labeling. The earlier decision involved in the split, Apotex, Inc. v. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc.  823 F.3d 51 (2d … Continue reading

Houston College of Law enjoined from using name

On Friday, October 14, 2016, a federal judged ruled that Houston College of Law must change its name, at least for the duration of pending trademark litigation.  The temporary injunction stems from a trademark infringement suit the University of Houston brought against Houston College of Law, a private law school which until June had been … Continue reading

Redskins won’t join Slants’ trademark case at SCOTUS

The Supreme Court has refused the Washington Redskins’ request to join The Slants’ case challenging the Lanham Act’s ban on the registration of offensive trademarks. Pro-Football, Inc. v. Blackhorse, Case No. 15-1311 (U.S. Supreme Court’s Order List at 58, Oct. 3, 2016). Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to review The Slants’ case regarding whether … Continue reading

Intra-Circuit split should give advertisers pause

While advertising off-label claims for medical devices and pharmaceuticals may be like sailing into stormy waters, companies might assume that advertising their products based on FDA-vetted labeling is, if not a safe harbor, at least a reasonably sheltered cove.  The recent Second Circuit decision in Church & Dwight Co. Inc., v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, … Continue reading

“Sue me already” – Analyzing Kanye’s (In)Famous Video (Part III)

Over the past week, the Brand Protection Blog has reviewed the different legal claims unwitting stars of Kanye West’s “Famous” video might assert the rap artist. In Part I, we analyzed claims for Trademark Infringement. In Part II, we took a look at claims for False Endorsement. Today, we consider whether the “Famous” video violates celebrities’ rights … Continue reading

“Sue me already” – Analyzing Kanye’s (In)Famous Video (Part II)

In our 3-part series, the Brand Protection Blog is reviewing the different legal claims unwitting stars of Kanye West’s “Famous” video might assert. In Part I, we analyzed claims for Trademark Infringement. Today we will cover False Endorsement. False Endorsement Some legal commentators have suggested that the celebrities featured in Mr. West’s video could bring a … Continue reading

Long legal battle ends with jury victory for Coca-Cola in pomegranate juice dispute

A California jury recently ended an eight-year legal battle between POM Wonderful (“POM”) and The Coca-Cola Company (“Coca-Cola”) finding that Coca-Cola’s Pomegranate-Blueberry juice labeling did not mislead customers, even though the juice contained less than 1% Pomegranate and Blueberry juices combined. Procedural History We have been following the critical twists and turns of this litigation which began in 2008 … Continue reading
LexBlog