Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A battle between two dietary supplement manufacturers has revived interested in the intersection between the Lanham Act and federal labeling regulations. The issue: can an advertiser challenge a competitor’s product label for false advertising under the Lanham Act if it complies with applicable federal regulations? The Supreme Court of the United States answered the question affirmatively in 2014 with regard to food products, and now the 11th Circuit has weighed in with regard to dietary supplements. In Hi-Tech Pharms, Inc. v HBA Intl’s Corp, 2018 WL 6314282, No. 17-13884 (11th Cir. Dec 4, 2018), the Circuit Court ruled that a Lanham Act claim for unfair or deceptive advertising could proceed even if a supplement’s label had complied with the requirements of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA).
By J. Alexander Lawrence
Since the advent of the Internet, the music industry has been in a pitched battle to combat online piracy. Initially, the industry focused on shutting down services that offered peer-to-peer or other similar platforms, such as Napster, Aimster and Grokster. For a time, the industry also focused on filing claims against individual infringers to dissuade others from engaging similar conduct. In recent years, the industry seems to have shifted focus toward Internet Service Providers.
By Connor Tucker
The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) requires pleading a connection between a trade secret, a product or service, and interstate commerce. But failure to prove such a connection divests the district court of subject matter jurisdiction. This article summarizes the first three years of cases discussing the jurisdictional element and explores implications.
By Veronica Mullally Munoz
By Jeffrey S. Ginsberg
SCOTUS Confirms that Secret Sales Continue to Qualify as Prior Art Under the AIA
New York District Judge Extends Estoppel Under §315(e) to Grounds Not Raised in Petition for Inter Partes Review