§Why CasetextPricing

Elorac, Inc. v. Henson et al

MOTION

28 Cited authorities

  1. General Electric Co. v. Joiner

    522 U.S. 136 (1997)   Cited 4,850 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the abuse of discretion standard the appellate court will not reverse unless the ruling is manifestly erroneous

  2. Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc.

    572 U.S. 545 (2014)   Cited 1,376 times   122 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an "exceptional" case under § 285 is "one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party's litigating position ... or the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated"

  3. Mylan Laboratories, Inc. v. Matkari

    7 F.3d 1130 (4th Cir. 1993)   Cited 4,007 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff's "claims that the defendants falsely represented that their drugs had been ‘properly approved by the FDA’ must fail"

  4. McClain v. Metabolife Intern., Inc.

    401 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2005)   Cited 438 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court erroneously admitted expert testimony that a weight-loss supplement caused the plaintiff's medical problems

  5. Stockstill v. Shell Oil Co.

    510 U.S. 1197 (1994)   Cited 118 times
    Dismissing for failure to state a claim plaintiff's "ingenious" attempt to "use the Lanham Act as a vehicle by which to enforce the" FDCA

  6. J. J. Vision Care v. 1-800 Contacts

    299 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2002)   Cited 268 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Vacating preliminary injunction against defendant due to lack of evidence that defendant's references in advertising to "eye doctor" rather than "eye care practitioner" could have had any effect on consumer behavior

  7. National Basketball Assoc. v. Motorola, Inc.

    105 F.3d 841 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 289 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that state law commercial misappropriation claim brought by the NBA against pager service that delivered real-time game scores was preempted, because the allegations supporting the NBA's claim were "virtually synonymous [with] wrongful copying and are in no meaningful fashion distinguishable from infringement of a copyright"

  8. Guile v. U.S.

    422 F.3d 221 (5th Cir. 2005)   Cited 225 times
    Holding that expert opinion based on "incorrect factual assumptions" was insufficient to create triable issue of fact

  9. Pebble Beach Co. v. Tour 18 I Limited

    155 F.3d 526 (5th Cir. 1998)   Cited 244 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court must consider application of digits in light of comparative advertising claim

  10. Camel Hair Mfrs. v. Saks

    284 F.3d 302 (1st Cir. 2002)   Cited 165 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, although the plaintiff was entitled to a presumption of consumer deception, remand was required for further proceedings on causation

  11. Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54   Cited 41,026 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"

  12. Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

    15 U.S.C. § 1125   Cited 15,229 times   320 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"

  13. Section 1117 - Recovery for violation of rights

    15 U.S.C. § 1117   Cited 4,863 times   144 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts significant discretion to award damages for a violation of § 1125

  14. Section 337 - Proceedings in name of United States; provision as to subpoenas

    21 U.S.C. § 337   Cited 666 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Restricting FDCA enforcement to suits by the United States