Porous Media Corporation v. Pall Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying presumption of consumer deception to an implied falsity claim when there is intent to deceive
• “Instruction No. 19 contains two separate rebuttable presumptions. The first, which we refer to as a presumption of deception ...”
• “[W]here a defendant is guilty of misrepresenting its own product without targeting any other specific product, it is erroneous to apply a rebuttable presumption of harm in favor of a competitor.”
• “A plaintiff suing to enjoin conduct that violates the Lanham Act need not prove specific damage ... [however] [i]n contrast, courts require a heightened level of proof of injury in order to recover money damages”
• “In a civil case, the exposure of extraneous evidence to the jury ‘mandates a new trial only upon a showing that the materials are prejudicial to the unsuccessful party.’ ”
• first element of a claim of product disparagement or “trade libel”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).