Case No. 22-2160, Crocs, Inc., v. Effervescent, Inc., Holey Soles Holdings, Ltd.

Court

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Our Position

The Court should affirm that no per se rule exists precluding words such as “patented,” “exclusive,” or “proprietary” from giving rise to Lanham Act Section 43(a)(1)(B) false advertising claims and should recognize the limits of the Supreme Court’s holding in Dastar. Such a rule would unduly restrict the ability of competitors to address false advertising and would increase the risk of consumer deception.

Download this Brief