“We agree with Dawgs that these allegations about Crocs’ advertisement statements are directed to the nature, characteristics, or qualities of Crocs’ shoes.” – Federal Circuit opinion
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled in a precedential opinion on Thursday, October 3, that Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act does apply to a party’s false claims that it holds a patent on a product feature coupled with related advertisements that cause consumers to be misled about the “nature, characteristics, or qualities of its product.” The opinion was authored by Judge Reyna and the panel included Judge Alan Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation.
The case involves an appeal from a Colorado district court, which granted summary judgment to Crocs, Inc. against Double Diamond Distribution, Dawgs, Inc. and Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC (Dawgs) that Dawgs’ counterclaim in a patent infringement suit brought by Crocs failed as a matter of law. Dawgs had counterclaimed after being sued for patent infringement by Crocs, arguing that Crocs was liable for damages for false advertising in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, which bars false or misleading descriptions of goods or services, including under paragraph B those who “in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial...
Odyssey Jones has spoken out for the first time since his departure from WWE in 2024 following domestic violence allegations that surfaced during his time with the company. Jones, who was quietly ...