Search

Insights: Publications Crocs Versus Dawgs: The Federal Circuit Holds That Falsely Stating a Product is “Patented” Can Lead to A False Advertising Claim

Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal

Written by Marissa C. Truskowski, Bryan J. Wolin and Christopher Thomas
In Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc. et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that a false advertising cause of action arises where a party falsely claims that it holds a patent on a product feature and advertises the feature in a manner that causes consumers to be misled about the nature, characteristics, or qualities of the product. The Federal Circuit decision has provided a new avenue for false patent marking claims under the Lanham Act that has different requirements and awards of damages than a false marking claim under the Patent Act.
Read Full Article

Insights View All

Webinars

Dynamic Thinking for an Interpersonal Edge

Events

Advanced Patent Law Seminar

Events

Annual Review of Patent Case Law (Winston-Salem)

Webinars

Annual Review of Patent Case Law (Charlotte)

Events

Ethics, Personal Well-Being, and Technology Seminar

close
Loading...
If you would like to receive related insights and information from Kilpatrick Townsend, please provide your contact details by filling out the form and clicking “Agree.” If you would like to access the PDF only, please click “Download Only.”