Zesty Paws v. Nutramax was an appeal in the Second Circuit from the Southern District of New York that dealt with false advertising claims under the Lanham Act. Zesty Paws and Nutramax sell competing products in the veterinary supplement industry. After Zesty Paws advertised itself as the number one pet supplement brand in the United…
One of my mentors at the first law firm where I worked said, “You’re not a grownup until you’ve lost one you should have won, and you’ve won one that you should have lost.” In CareDX Inc. v. Natera, Inc.,plaintiff biomedical company CareDx seems to have done both, first in the District of Delaware and…
Crocs v. Effervescent was a case appealed from the District of Colorado to the Federal Circuit. The appellants were Double Diamond and Mojave Desert Holdings, who make “Dawgs” shoes. After suing a number of other companies for patent infringement, Crocs had turned its sights on Dawgs — but Dawgs filed a counterclaim that Crocs was…
A case in the Northern District of California was notable for the way it ended, as opposed to its otherwise straightforwardness. Leftfield Holdings v. Google was a class action started on behalf of several restaurateurs of Mexican food who accused Google of trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false association, and false advertising. This was a motion to…