|
|
|
 |
In the Matter of the Investigation of Electronic Interception Billing Practices
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
We represented T-Mobile USA Inc. in an unfair competition and false advertising class action in the Northern District of California. The action alleged that when T-Mobile assigns new customers previously-used phone numbers, the new customers are “routinely” charged for subscription services authorized, if at all, only by the old user of that number. The case has been settled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennington Seed, Inc. v. The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company, Inc., et al.
Central Garden & Pet
Winston & Strawn defended Pennington Seed in false advertising claims brought by competitor Scotts Miracle-Gro, and subsequently brought false advertising claims against Scotts on behalf of Pennington. Our client ran a television advertisement touting the water-saving benefit resulting from a new ingredient in its grass seed. Scotts alleged false advertising against Pennington and filed a preliminary injunction requesting that our client discontinue running its grass seed advertisement. The court denied the request. Pennington then filed a false advertising claim against Scotts, which had run an advertisement showing a person lounging on a lawn that was half green and lush and half yellow and sickly. The Scotts ad claimed that the yellow, s
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Food Company Unfair Competition Class Action
Winston & Strawn represented a publicly traded international company in the food industry against representatives of a putative class of 1,600 commercial walnut growers throughout California in a $70 million claim alleging that our client failed to pay agreed-upon prices for the growers’ crops, violated various statutes, and committed violations of the California Unfair Competition Law. Our attorneys obtained an order striking all of plaintiffs’ class action allegations at which point the case was stayed indefinitely by stipulation pending plaintiffs’ appeal to the Third District Court of Appeal, which is ongoing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In re Epogen & Aranesp Off-label Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
Fresenius Medical Care North America
Our attorneys successfully defended Fresenius Medical Care North America, Inc., obtaining a rare dismissal of a class action at the initial pleading stage. In this case, seven health benefit plans alleged that Amgen conspired with Fresenius and DaVita, the country’s largest and second-largest dialysis providers, respectively, to promote off-label uses of Amgen’s blockbuster anti-anemia drugs Epogen and Aranesp. Fresenius obtained a dismissal, with leave to amend, of the initial class action filed against it in February 2008. In April 2008, the various class actions were consolidated within a multi-district litigation. Thereafter, in a consolidated amended complaint, the health benefit plans alleged that Amgen had promoted Epogen and Aranesp
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultreo v. Proctor & Gamble
Ultreo, Inc.
Winston has scored a major victory for its client, Ultreo, Inc., against the Procter & Gamble Company, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
|
|
|
|
|
|
O'Keeffe's Inc. v. Underwriters Laboratories
Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Underwriters Laboratories (UL) is a lawsuit claiming unfair competition and fraud brought by O'Keeffe's Inc. in the Northern District of California. O'Keeffe's, a large manufacturer of fire resistant glazing, alleged that UL had unfairly sided with O'Keeffe's competitors in UL's testing of fire resistant glazing under UL safety standards. O'Keeffe's sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction; UL filed a motion to dismiss. After a hearing, the Northern District of California issued an order denying O'Keeffe's motion for preliminary injunction and granting UL's motion to dismiss, with prejudice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising Contracts
Over the years, our attorneys have represented major advertisers, celebrities, writers, and ad agencies parties in drafting and negotiating numerous marketing-related contracts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising Challenges
Winston & Strawn's advertising practice represents clients before the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus and its appellate body, the National Advertising Review Board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bacardi Youth Targeting Litigation
Bacardi USA, Inc., Bacardi Limited, Baca
Bacardi Youth Targeting Litigation
Winston & Strawn represented Bacardi U.S.A., Inc., its parent Bacardi, Ltd., and various other corporations in the Bacardi family in nine putative class action suits brought by parents of underage consumers who bought alcohol beverages prior to turning 21. Among other claims, the plaintiffs alleged that beverage alcohol manufacturers have “targeted” underage consumers with marketing designed to make drinking more attractive. We have obtained dismissals, with prejudice, of the actions in Colorado, the District of Columbia, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The courts in these cases ruled that the alcohol advertisements were legal when shown to of-age adults, that the ads do not state that under
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Hunt, Terry Johnson et al. v. PepsiCo, Inc. and BBDO Worldwide, Inc.
BBDO
We represented PepsiCo, Inc. and BBDO Worldwide, Inc. in a lawsuit brought by the Flamingos, a 50s rock band, involving our clients’ use of the Flamingos’ version of “I Only Have Eyes for You” in a 1997 Superbowl commercial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eastman Kodak Memory Card Litigation
Eastman Kodak
We are currently representing the Eastman Kodak Company in a state court class action in San Francisco. The plaintiffs are challenging representations made by Kodak regarding the storage capacity of memory cards and digital cameras.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frito-Lay, Inc. Case #4270 regarding Lay’s Stax Original Potato Crisps
Frito-Lay, Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Frito-Lay Inc. in a false advertising challenge by The Procter & Gamble Company before the National Advertising Division (NAD) regarding the taste preference claim, “America Prefers the Taste of Lay’s Stax Original Potato Crisps over Pringles’ Original Potato Crisps.” Frito-Lay introduced Stax in September 2003 to directly compete with Pringles, which is one of P&G’s largest brands with more than $1 billion in annual sales. The NAD held that Frito-Lay’s claim was substantiated and that P&G’s taste test was not sufficiently reliable to rebut Frito-Lay’s evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Trudeau v. George Lanoue
Trudeau Kevin
We represented Kevin Trudeau in a lawsuit brought in the Northern District of Illinois against George Lanoue alleging trademark infringement and violation of the Federal Annual Cybersquatting Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stuczynski v. The Dickinson Family, Inc.
The J.M. Smucker Company
We represented an affiliate of The J.M. Smucker Co. in a consumer class action claiming, among other things, violations of Sections 17200 et seq. and 17500 et seq. of the California Business and Professions Code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verizon Directories Corp. v. Yellow Book USA
Verizon Communications
Winston recently garnered successful results for Verizon Communications in
connection with a suit seeking an injunction prohibiting Yellow Book from
continuing a nationwide advertising campaign that Verizon alleged was false and
misleading. After a three-week bench trial in the Eastern District of New York,
Judge Weinstein ruled that Yellow Book had violated the Lanham Act and New York
state law by making false claims that more people use the Yellow Book than use
the yellow page directories published by Verizon Directories Corporation. The
parties later settled the damages phase of the case, which was scheduled for
jury trial in December 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zenith Electronics Section 17200 Matter
Zenith Electronics Corp
We represented Zenith in a multi-party action this past year alleging that our client included false and misleading information on the packaging of MP3 players because it listed the megabyte and gigabyte capacity of the product in a metric rather than binary format After engaging in law-and-motion and limited discovery, we were able to obtain a favorable settlement for our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Prize Giveaway Class Actions
McDonald's Corp.
Our attorneys represented McDonald's in consumer class actions brought in federal and state courts across the country related to allegations of wrongdoing in connection with McDonald’s Monopoly and Who Wants To Be A Millionaire game prize giveaways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mail-In Rebate Litigation
Motorola, Inc.
Our attorneys obtained early dismissals of consumer class action and personal representative lawsuits against Eastman Kodak Company and Motorola, Inc., and 20 other major manufacturers. These lawsuits alleged that the 1970 California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 et seq.) outlawed the manufacturer mail-in rebate and demanded that the manufacturers immediately cease and desist from offering mail-in rebates in California and pay millions in restitution and damages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barr Laboratories, Inc. v. DuPont Merck Pharmaceutical Company
Barr Laboratories, Inc.
We represented Barr Laboratories in litigation against DuPont claiming that DuPont illegally monopolized the market for warfarin sodium and violated the Lanham Act in its advertising and promotion. After defeating DuPont's motion to dismiss, which was based partly on First Amendment grounds, and winning key rulings forcing the defendant to turn over its sales force database, Barr was able to obtain a settlement worth over $100 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Google Bookmarks
LinkedIn
Live
Reddit
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Twitter
Yahoo! Bookmarks
Yahoo! MyWeb
