False Advertising/Lanham Act Litigation


    • FidoPharm in an advertising challenge against Adams’s false comparative claims for its Spot On flea control product.
    • Gerber, in a series of false advertising challenges filed against Beech-Nut’s advertising claims. In one challenge, Gerber challenged Beech-Nut’s claims that its baby food was “fresh,” “all-natural,” not “fluffed…with fillers,” and “simply a better choice.” The NAD agreed with Gerber that Beech-Nut should modify or discontinue its claims that the products are “fresh” and “all natural” and also held that the “better choice” claim was false when used in context with the other advertising claims that purported to explain why Beech-Nut was better. In a second challenge, Gerber objected to Beech-Nut’s advertising that some of its products were specially made for morning or for evening feedings; the NAD found that the claims were not substantiated and that Beech-Nut should discontinue the product lines.
    • Nestlé in false advertising challenges against Ross Laboratories over advertising for Isomil Advance and Similac EarlyShield baby formulas.
    • Alcon Laboratories in defending false advertising claims asserted by Bausch & Lomb against Alcon's new contact lens solution, Replenish.
    • Sony Pictures Entertainment in a trademark/false advertising dispute involving the battle scene between Spider-Man and the Green Goblin in the hit motion picture Spider-Man.
    • Bayer in false advertising challenges against Merial, Sergeant’s, Summit, Elanco and Farnam over advertising for their competing flea and tick control products for pets.
    • Stouffer's, in a false advertising challenge brought against Con Agra's Marie Callender's frozen lasagna. Stouffer's successfully challenged advertising for Marie Callender's Three Meat, Four Cheese lasagna which compared it to Stouffer's smaller, traditional meat & cheese lasagna and claimed a taste preference. The advertising was successfully challenged on the ground that the ""apples to oranges"" comparison at the heart of the campaign was unfair and failed to disclose the many differences between the compared products.
    • Nestlé in back-to-back victories in false advertising disputes over advertising for Ross’s Isomil Advance and Similac EarlyShield baby formulas.
    • Alcon Laboratories in its challenge with the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau concerning advertisements by Bausch & Lomb regarding its ReNu MultiPlus contact lens solution.
    • A wide range of clients, including the producers of a popular musical stage show and a PBS affiliate in entertainment, false advertising, copyright and trademark litigation and counseling matters; a leading cable television network in a dispute over rights to a popular reality show; clients in multiple industries, including fashion, beverage and pharmaceuticals, in trademark matters; and a national radio company in a trademark dispute over rights to a popular character on a morning drive show.
    • A multinational pharmaceutical company in precedent-setting litigation against use of trademark on ground that product name constitutes false advertising.
    • Obtaining preliminary injunction in May 2013 in false advertising matter on behalf of Bayer Healthcare LLC .
    • Bayer, in false advertising challenges against Summit VetPharm and Elanco regarding advertising claims for the animal health products.
    • Novartis in a long string of false advertising victories in the NAD for smoking cessation products, anti-fungal products, antacids, medical foods and decongestants.
    • Bridgestone in false advertising challenges against Michelin tires.