United States Eleventh Circuit

In a trademark infringement case involving claims against defendants for the advertisement of certain health products, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the record unequivocally demonstrated that plaintiff did not own a valid trademark interest for claims of infringement brought under the Lanham Act; 2) plaintiff did not suffer injury for prudential standing to assert a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act; and 3) in light of plaintiff's insufficient interest and lack of judicial standing, plaintiff's claims also failed under alternative common law theories which require elements plaintiff could not prove.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/13/2008
• Published 06/13/2008

Judges

• MARCUS, Circuit Judge:, Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eleventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Guy B. Bailey, Jr., Bailey & Dawes L.C., Miami, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Bruce S. Meyer, New York City, Edward Soto, Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, Miami, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.