Intellectual Property Law

Court Denies Cross Motions for Summary Judgment in False Advertising Case

By Michael Atkins

Since I’ve covered it here, here and here, I might as well report that the Western District denied the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment in Campagnolo S.R.L. v. Full Speed Ahead, Inc., a false advertising case between competing bicycle component manufacturers.

The order is pretty fact-specific, but it involved dueling survey experts who together helped generate genuine issues of material fact when each party’s facts were examined in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.

Of interest is the court’s recognition that a party need not prove actual damages to recover under Washington’s Consumer Protection Act.

The court noted: “the Washington Supreme Court has held that ‘nonquantifiable injuries, such as loss of goodwill’ are sufficient to meet the injury element of a CPA claim. Contrary to FSA’s arguments, the more recent decision of Indoor Billboard/Washington, Inc. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc., does not contradict this proposition. That case merely holds that there must be a demonstrable causal link between the misrepresentation and the plaintiff’s injury.”

Trial’s set for June 1.

The case cite is Campagnolo S.R.L. v. Full Speed Ahead, Inc., No. 08-1372 (W.D. Wash. May 11, 2010) (Martinez, J.).

Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on May 13, 2010 (boomark / email).