Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

FeaturesThe Intellectual Property StrategistIntellectual PropertyUnited States Supreme Court

11th Circuit Weighs in on Intersection of Lanham Act and FDCA Protein Powder Labeling Requirements

By Kyle-Beth Hilfer
February 01, 2019

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).

Background

The FDCA does not allow a private litigant to pursue action for misbranding of a dietary supplement. Accordingly, brands frustrated by a competitor's label claims might seek recourse for false advertising through the Lanham Act's Section 43 (a). The Lanham Act has trademark provisions to stave off unfair competition, but it also prohibits false advertising and authorizes private suit against those who use a false or misleading description or representation of the "nature, characteristics, [or] qualities" of their goods. The statute is designed to protect and compensate a private party for the damages that flow from such deceptive statements. The intersection between the FDCA and 43(a) claims has led to litigation. If a label meets all federal compliance requirements, could there still be liability under the Lanham Act?

After a battle in the 9th Circuit, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) weighed in on this question with regard to juice beverages in POM Wonderful LLC v Coca-Cola Co., 573 U. S. ____ (2014). In its Lanham Act challenge, POM alleged that Coke's juice product's name, label, marketing, and advertising misled consumers into thinking the product was mostly a pomegranate and blueberry juice when it in fact was mostly apple and grape juice. Coke countered that its product met FDCA requirements for its juice name and label, and that the FDCA's regulations preclude any Lanham Act claim. SCOTUS reversed the 9th Circuit decision and held that POM's Lanham Act claim against Coca Cola was not precluded.

The Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the case, instead remanding it back to the Ninth Circuit. At the same time, the court's opinion makes it clear that there can be Lanham Act liability for food and beverage labeling practices that "mislead and trick consumers, all to the injury of competitors." (For a more detailed discussion of the Supreme Court's POM Wonderful decision, see this author's previous article in the August 2014 issue of The Intellectual Property Strategist.)

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Top 5 Strategies for Managing the End-of-Year Collections Frenzy Image

End of year collections are crucial for law firms because they allow them to maximize their revenue for the year, impacting profitability, partner distributions and bonus calculations by ensuring outstanding invoices are paid before the year closes, which is especially important for meeting financial targets and managing cash flow throughout the firm.

The Self-Service Buyer Is On the Rise Image

Law firms and companies in the professional services space must recognize that clients are conducting extensive online research before making contact. Prospective buyers are no longer waiting for meetings with partners or business development professionals to understand the firm's offerings. Instead, they are seeking out information on their own, and they want to do it quickly and efficiently.

Should Large Law Firms Penalize RTO Rebels or Explore Alternatives? Image

Through a balanced approach that combines incentives with accountability, firms can navigate the complexities of returning to the office while maintaining productivity and morale.

Sink or Swim: The Evolving State of Law Firm Administrative Support Image

The paradigm of legal administrative support within law firms has undergone a remarkable transformation over the last decade. But this begs the question: are the changes to administrative support successful, and do law firms feel they are sufficiently prepared to meet future business needs?

Tax Treatment of Judgments and Settlements Image

Counsel should include in its analysis of a case the taxability of the anticipated and sought after damages as the tax effect could be substantial.