JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Trade Secret Enforcement in Spain
Huggies Diaper Evidence Not a Good "Fit" for #1 Claim, NAD Says - Huggies claimed its diapers were the #1 Best Fitting, a broad claim requiring broad evidence against the market—evidence that the National Advertising...more
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a flurry of new bills at the end of the legislative session, including numerous bills that will impact employers across various industries across the state. Some of the key changes...more
On July 18, 2023, the California Supreme Court held as a matter of first impression that a public interest advocacy organization maintains standing to bring claims under the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), if it has incurred...more
In the first ruling of its kind, the California Court of Appeal (4th Dist.) recently ruled that a plaintiff may pursue penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for alleged violations of California’s sick pay...more
On December 4, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court order dismissing, for lack of Article III standing, a putative class action involving allegations that the plaintiff was harmed by...more
The California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, recently affirmed judgment in favor of a fruit snack manufacturer who claimed “fruit” was stated to be the first ingredient on a front label but listed “fruit puree”...more
The California Supreme Court recently held that claims brought by the government for civil penalties under California’s unfair competition law (B&PC § 17200, et seq.) and false advertising law (B&PC § 17500, et seq.) are to...more
The California Supreme Court held there is no statutory or constitutional right to a jury trial in actions brought under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and False Advertising Law (FAL). Its reasoning and basis likely...more
The California Supreme Court has confirmed that claims for civil penalties brought by government entities under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) and False Advertising Law (“FAL”) should be decided by a judge—not a...more
The California Court of Appeal recently made it more difficult for plaintiffs to certify class actions based on false advertising or fraud. In Downey v. Public Storage, Inc., Case No. B291662, ___Cal.App.5th___ (Feb. 6,...more
The California Court of Appeal has affirmed a complete victory by Safeway Inc. over a certified class of wage-and-hour plaintiffs. Esparza v. Safeway Inc., et al., B287927 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC369766, June 10,...more
After Ninth Circuit review, it remains to be seen whether a nutritional supplement maker can claim that ginkgo biloba leaf extract and vinpocetine supplements improve “alertness,” “mental clarity, and memory” in the face of...more
Addressing the California Resale Royalties Act (CRRA), the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a district court’s dismissal of a plaintiff’s CRRA claims concerning resale royalties that postdated the 1976...more
On November 8, 2018, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict in a consumer class action deceptive advertising case in favor of Defendants Boiron Inc. and Boiron USA, Inc. (together, “Boiron”), the sellers of a homeopathic...more
In Jesus Cuitlahuac Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC, et al, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District has held that the ABC test set forth in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4...more
In a recent decision, the California Court of Appeal reaffirmed and clarified how the “reasonable consumer” standard must be applied at the pleadings stage to mislabeling claims. In simplest terms, if the packaging makes a...more
On August 13, 2018, the California Supreme Court answered a question certified to it by the Ninth Circuit, holding that a loan with a high interest rate can be unconscionable, even if the legislature specifically declined to...more
Deciding an issue of first impression, the California Court of Appeal issued a writ of mandate confirming that there is only one standard for the admissibility of expert opinion in California, and that standard applies when...more
Nearly two years ago, a California appellate court invalidated a rule promulgated by the state’s Insurance Commissioner, on the ground that the regulator lacks authority to prohibit “deceptive acts or practices” which are not...more
On December 15, 2016, the California Court of Appeals in Los Angeles came to a surprising summary judgment decision in Sajid Veera et al. v. Banana Republic, LLC. The court held that plaintiffs who claimed they were misled...more
The California Court of Appeal recently confirmed, in case there was any doubt, that plaintiffs must allege (and ultimately prove) actual reliance to adequately state a fraudulent prong Unfair Competition Law claim (Cal. Bus....more