News & Analysis as of

False Advertising › Supreme Court of the United States › Corporate Counsel

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Rules Lost Wages May Be Recoverable Under RICO For False Advertising After Drug Test Dismissal

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On April 2, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a truck driver who lost his job after testing positive for marijuana may pursue claims for lost wages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Is the Federal Circuit Breathing Life Back Into False Patent Marking Claims?

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

The Federal Circuit determined that if a company misleads consumers about the nature of a product by making false patent marking claims, it can be held liable under the Lanham Act. False marking claims under the Lanham Act...more

ArentFox Schiff

ESG Update: Three Climate Change Decisions to Watch as the Temperature Rises

ArentFox Schiff on

Below, we break down three recent decisions and explain why the regulated community should pay attention to them: the first from the Southern District of New York in City of New York v. Exxon Mobil Corporation; the second...more

Proskauer - Advertising Law

Stars Fail to Align for P&G, as Supreme Court Rejects Class Certification Appeal

Proskauer - Advertising Law on

Readers may recall our coverage in recent months of the challenge by Procter & Gamble (P&G) to an order certifying a multi-state consumer class in a case asserting that P&G falsely advertised its probiotic supplement Align....more

Proskauer - Advertising Law

A Yarn Spun, But Advertising Not Tailored to a Lanham Act Claim

Proskauer - Advertising Law on

In a recent application of the Supreme Court’s 2014 Lexmark decision on standing, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held last month that a yarn retailer who alleged it was misled by its supplier into purchasing...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Beginning to Close the POM Circle? – POM Wonderful and Drug Advertising: JHP Pharmaceuticals

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Earlier this year, in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.,[1] the Supreme Court examined the interaction between the Lanham Act’s prohibition against false advertising and the FDCA’s prohibition against food, drug and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

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

McDermott Will & Emery on

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

7 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide