Lederman v. The Hershey Company, No. 1:2021cv04528 – Document 43 (N.D. Ill. 2022) Plaintiff asserts that hot fudge topping would contain the ingredients essential to hot fudge – cream and whole milk. She asserts that the quality of fudge depends on the amount and type of fat-contributing ingredients and that those fat ingredients are typically from dairy or vegetable oils. These are the ingredients of Hershey Hot Fudge topping: This product contains skim milk and whey milk. The consistency is derived from vegetable fat. Accordingly, plaintiff alleges that the labeling of this product as hot ..read more

  Defendant’s vanilla bean ice cream contains specks of vanilla bean. Plainitff alleges that the specks contain no flavor, and that the vanilla flavor is derived from vanillin and synthetic vanillin. IT might be the case that very little of the flavor comes from the vanilla beans as opposed as from the extracts, but there is no plausible allegation that there is a material misrepresentation as to the percentage of the flavor that comes from vanilla beans. Case dismissed. vanilla bean labeling sdny decision     ..read more

Plaintiff extracts spring water. One defendant allegedly extracts well water, which it misrepresents as spring water to other defendants, who are bottlers, and who also misrepresent the water as spring water. Applying Lexmark, court holds that bottler defendants’ alleged false statements do not proximately injury plaintiff (as opposed to the false statements by extractor defendant,  a competitor of plaintiff, which statements could proximately injure plaintiff). 43(B)log discussion here. [embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2018/06/frompovicz-v-niagar ..read more

Law firm LegalForce RAPC is the largest filer of trademarks in the U.S.. It has filed several lawsuits against document preparation services, generally premised on the allegation that these firms are engaged in the unlicensed practice of law. In this action against document preparation service TM411, LegalForce’s false advertising claim was dismissed as it insufficiently plead facts that various statements on TM411’s website would mislead consumers. With the federal claim out, the Court dismissed the remaining state unfair competition claims as well. 43blog discussion here. [embeddoc url=”http ..read more

Anthem Sports LLC v. Under the Weather, LLC, 17cv596 (D. Conn. March 6 2018) Patent and trademark dispute relating to small tents for viewing outdoor sports. As 43(B)log points out, the judge used the term SPORTSPOD generically in the decision, which doesn’t bode well for the trademark claim. Calling something a shoddy knockoff is an opinion and therefore not actionable under 43(a)(1)(B). Falsely claiming to be the inventor of something is not actionable under 43(a)(1)(A) per Dastar. [embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2018/03/anthem-sports-v-under-the-w ..read more

Defendant allegedly ran photos of plaintiff models, to promote defendant’s resorts. Discussion of what tort this might be (false advertisement, unjust enrichment), and what it might not be (negligence per se). Also, complaint was a few hundred pages too long. [embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2016/05/caliente-motion-to-dismiss-1.pdf ..read more

. . or when the HAAS mark is the housemark. I can stop making horrible puns any time I want to. 43blog summary here. [embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2016/03/haas-door-v-haas-garage-door-ND-Ohio-1.pdf ..read more

Collecting permit fees from homeowners, then not filing for the permits, is likely not compliance with ‘strictest industry standards.’ 43(a)(1)(B) Large damage award in 'lead paint removal' case S. Carolina http://t.co/yyGDL4U0py — TrademarkBlog (@TrademarkBlog) September 9, 2014 ..read more

..read more

This is a lawsuit my firm filed against a company that we allege is a ‘trademark scammer.’ Defendants moved to dismiss. The Court maintained our false advertising claim. 43(b)log comments here. leason ellis v pta.pdf var docstoc_docid=’171665371′; var docstoc_title=’leason ellis v pta.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’leason ellis v pta.pdf ..read more