[In Case Summaries By Court]
Advertisers' False Advertising Claims Against Newspapers Based On Alleged False Circulation Figures Dismissed In two separate cases, U.S. Dist. Court Judge Hurley dismissed false advertising claims brought by advertisers against various newspapers, based on alleged false circulation claims made by the newspapers, because the advertisers were consumers, and not competitors, of the newspapers. As consumers, the advertisers thus lacked standing to bring false advertising claims under the Lanham Act. Crab House Of Douglaston, Inc., et al. v. Newsday, Inc., et al. and Arnold Chevrolet LLC, et al. v. Tribune Company, et al.
Also: Court Opinion -- Crab House case
Also: Court Opinion -- Arnold Chevrolet case

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Declaratory Relief Action Not Dismissed, But Transferred To District Where Defendant's Subsequently Filed Infringment Action Was Pending The court did not dismiss this declaratory relief action, filed in an attempt to preempt anticipated infringement litigation, but nonetheless transferred the case to the district where defendant's subsequently filed infringement action against plaintiff was pending. Journal Publications, Inc. v. American City Business Journals, Inc., __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2335194 (M.D.Pa. Sept. 23, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Summary Judgment Granted Against Spray Bottle Trade Dress Claims Due To Lack Of Any Proof To Suppport Claim The court granted summary judgment against plaintiffs' trade dress infringement claims because plaintiff's failed to present any evidence to satisfy any of the elements of the trade dress claims. Meyhoefer, et al. v. Arett Sales Corp., et al., __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2321256 (D.N.J. Sept. 22, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Summary Judgment Granted Against Musical Group's Infringement Action, Because Group's Name Held Descriptive And Secondary Meaning Not Shown The court held that the group's name – VOKAL – was merely descriptive, and not sufficiently distinguishable from the word "vocal." Vokal, Inc. v. Nelly, et al., __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2304965 (M.D.Fla. Sept. 21, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Plaintiff Avoids Summary Judgment On Laches Grounds Despite Five-Year Delay, Due To Disputed Factual Issues Regarding Progressive Encroachment Although the court found that plaintiff's five-year delay created a presumption of laches, it denied summary judgment on laches grounds because of factual questions concerning the application of the progressive encroachment doctrine, because plaintiff argued that it delayed bringing suit until the parties were more directly competitive. Ameripay LLC v. Ameripay Payroll, Ltd., __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2293676 (N.D.Ill. Sept. 16, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Denial Of Preliminary Injunction Affirmed Because Plaintiff Not Entitled To Rely On Presumption Of Harm In Dispute With Former Co-Venturer The First Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, because plaintiff could not show irreparable harm in this dispute with a former co-venturer. The court held that plaintiff could not rely on the presumption of irreparable harm that usually arises where a trademark has been infringed. Diálogo, LLC, et al. v. Santiago, et al,. __ F.3d __, 2005 WL 2253611 (1st Cir. Sept. 16, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Attorneys' Fees Denied To Defendant Who Prevailed On Summary Judgment Based On Immunity Under The Communications Decency Act The court granted summary judgment for Earthlink because it was immune from liability under the Communications Decency Act, and it did not reach the merits of plaintiff's Lanham Act claim. Accordingly, the court found that defendant was not entitled to recover attorneys' fees under the Lanham Act as the prevailing party. Associated Bank-Corp. v. Earthlink, Inc., __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2240952 (W.D.Wis. Sept. 15, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Court Grants Preliminary Injunction Against Misleading Fundraising-Related Telephone Solicitations That Constituted False Designation Of Origin And False Advertising The court found that defendant's failure to identify itself when it called merchants asking if they wanted to "renew" their participation in a fundraising discount card program was misleading, because it led the merchants to believe that they were dealing again with plaintiff, whose same program they had participated in previously. Varsity Gold, Inc. v. Elite Fundraising LLC, __F.Supp.2d__, 2005 WL 2246468 (W.D.Wash. Sept. 15, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion

[In Case Summaries By Court]
Summary Judgment Granted Against Plaintiff Screenwriter's False Designation Of Origin Claim Because Movie Not Substantially Similar To Her Screenplay, But Summary Judgment Denied As To Her Claim Against Defendant Screenwriter Post-Dastar credit denial claims still viable? The court granted summary judgment against plaintiff's false designation of origin claim that was based on failure to credit her as author of a screenplay, because the defendants' motion picture was not substantially similar to her work. But, the court denied summary judgment to the extent that the claim was based on the fact that the defendant screenwriter's draft scripts actually originated with plaintiff, and/or that plaintiff's work was falsely designated as being the work of the defendant screenwriter in the pitch and sale of his script. Notably, the opinion contains no mention of the Supreme Court's Dastar decision, and thus indicates that perhaps at least some false designation claims based on failure to accord credit for creative works still are viable after Dastar. Flaherty v. Filardi, et al., __ F.Supp.2d __, 2005 WL 2224989 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 14, 2005)
Also: Court Opinion