Alleged false advertising of consumer products is one of the most active areas in class action litigation. As most of these matters conclude before the courts can offer an opinion on damages, it is often unclear which damages theories are viable. A recent Ninth Circuit decision, Chowning et al. v. Kohl’s Department Stores Inc. et al. clarifies the issue –available remedies are substantially narrower than those often asserted. In this Law360 article, Timothy Snail discusses the implications of the recent ruling, and uses well-known examples to illustrate common theories of damages.
Click below to read the article.
Anticompetitive conduct and patents listed in the Orange Book
Branded pharmaceutical manufacturers are required by law to list all patents in the Orange Book that cover an approved drug product. However,...