Legal Opinion
Jarrow Formulas, Inc. v. International Nutrition Co.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided November 16, 2001No. CIV. 3:01CV00478(AVC)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
COVELLO, Chief Judge.
This is an action for damages and equitable relief in connection with the marketing and sale of nutritional supplements under certain United States patents. It is brought pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2 1 (the Sherman Antitrust Act), Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-24 to -46 2 (the Connecticut Antitrust Act), Conn. Gen.Stat. §§ 42-110a to -110q 3 (the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act or CUTPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) 4 (the Lanham Act), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-568 5 (the Connecticut vexatious litigation statute), and common law tenants…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Doe I v. CiolliDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2009
- In Re Gabapentin Patent LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2009
- Amerbelle Corp. v. HommelDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
- Hunter Stephens v. ESPN Productions, Inc., ESPN, Inc., The Walt Disney Company in their official capacities; Chris Calcinari, Brooke Leone, James Pitaro, Bob Iger, Bob Chapek, Derica W. Rice, Susan E. Arnold, Francis A. deSouza and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, in their individual capacities.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2026
- Inhold, LLC v. Pureshield, Inc.North Carolina Business Court · 2021