1
Jun/18

Applying Lexmark, ED Pa. Holds 43(a)(1)(A) Claim May Be Brought Against Competitor But Not Competitor’s Customers


Plaintiff extracts spring water. One defendant allegedly extracts well water, which it misrepresents as spring water to other defendants, who are bottlers, and who also misrepresent the water as spring water.

Applying Lexmark, court holds that bottler defendants’ alleged false statements do not proximately injury plaintiff (as opposed to the false statements by extractor defendant,  a competitor of plaintiff, which statements could proximately injure plaintiff).

43(B)log discussion here.

Comments are closed.