No. 25-959
Tags: advertising-campaign circuit-split consumer-deception false-advertising jury-inference lanham-act
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a jury hearing a false advertising case under the Lanham Act should be barred from inferring consumer deception and reliance upon finding that a defendant conducted a deliberately false advertising campaign.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a jury hearing a false advertising case under the Lanham Act should be barred from inferring consumer deception and reliance upon finding that a defendant conducted a deliberately false advertising campaign
Docket Entries
2026-03-05
Motion of Natera, Inc. for an extension of time submitted.
2026-02-24
Amicus brief of Truth In Advertising, Inc. And Scholars submitted.
2026-02-24
Brief amici curiae of Truth In Advertising, Inc., et al. filed.
2026-02-23
Response Requested. (Due March 25, 2026)
2026-02-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2026.
2026-02-12
Waiver of Natera, Inc. of right to respond submitted.
2026-02-12
Waiver of right of respondent Natera, Inc. to respond filed.
2026-02-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 13, 2026)
2025-12-19
Application (25A708) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until February 7, 2026.
2025-12-15
Application (25A708) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 8, 2026 to February 9, 2026, submitted to Justice Alito.
Attorneys
CareDx, Inc.
Noel John Francisco — Jones Day, Petitioner
Natera, Inc.
Robert Thomas Smith — Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Respondent
Truth In Advertising, Inc. And Scholars
Rebecca Leah Tushnet — Harvard Law School, Amicus