False Advertising


We guard our clients’ right to fair and open competition. False or deceptive product claims can severely damage a competitor. We are no strangers to complex bet-the-company litigation in this arena. We have successfully prosecuted numerous cases where our client’s competitors have made either literally false or impliedly false product claims and have recovered millions of dollars in damages. Conversely, we have successfully defended clients in such disputes.

Often, swift action is necessary to prevent a competitor’s continued use of false claims. We have successfully obtained preliminary injunctions against false advertising and deceptive trade practices many different times and in many different courts.

Our team also counsels clients on ways to navigate the legal shoals in this area so that litigation is avoided. Of course, should one of our clients be sued, AGG provides an efficient, result-oriented defense. While our practice represents a wide range of clients in a large number of industries, we have successfully litigated a significant number of matters relating to medical devices and pharmaceutical products. These cases require an understanding of not only the law relating to false advertising and deceptive trade practices but of regulations enforced by the Food and Drug Administration. Often, the outcome of such cases will dictate whether a competitive drug may be marketed against a senior user’s drug or whether additional testing and the related delay in the market introduction is required. A decision in such cases can, quite literally, be worth millions of dollars.

We serve not only as advocates but also as business counselors and advisors and as a result, very few cases alleging false advertising have been brought against existing AGG clients. When litigation has occurred, we work with the client to make the correct business decision concerning the litigation and work effectively and efficiently, with small, nimble teams of litigators, to efficiently handle the matter. In addition to practicing in state and federal court, we are familiar with matters involving the Federal Trade Commission, the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau, and other industry and governmental regulatory agencies.


  • Successfully represented a branded nutritional supplement company in a false advertising complaint against a generic drug company that made false comparative claims to the branded company’s products. Case settled prior to preliminary injunction hearing.

  • Successfully represented medical equipment manufacturer as plaintiff in a case against competitor alleging false advertising, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, defamation, and unfair competition. The firm obtained a preliminary injunction in this matter prohibiting the defendants from making various false representations about their competing product.

  • Successfully represented a national pharmaceutical manufacturer in a false advertising, copyright, and unfair competition action against competitor and competitor’s parent company. The firm developed strategy in an emerging area of Lanham Act litigation and pharmaceutical claims, and used its industry knowledge to effectively develop evidence of the false advertising campaign described in the complaint.

  • Successfully represented a branded pharmaceutical company as plaintiff against alleged generic competitor in case asserting false advertising and unfair competition claims.

  • Successfully represented a major frozen food manufacturer in a false advertising dispute concerning misuse of the term “Original.” Settled on terms favorable to our client shortly after suit was filed.

  • Successfully represented a generic drug company on claims that it had falsely advertised its product as the generic equivalent of a marketed brand product. Case settled prior to trial.

  • Successfully represented a marine products manufacturer as plaintiff in a case against a competitor alleging false advertising, unfair competition, Georgia Deceptive Trade Practices Act violations, commercial disparagement, and tortious interference with contract and business relations. The firm obtained a preliminary injunction in this matter prohibiting the defendants from making various false representations about their competing product and the plaintiff’s product. The firm also obtained an order requiring the defendants to undertake corrective advertising and to issue a letter of retraction as additional preliminary remedies.

  • Represented U.S. manufacturer of boating equipment in federal false advertising litigation against a competitor. Obtained a preliminary injunction on behalf of client requiring the competitor to cease distribution of promotional materials, remove pages from its website, issue retraction letters to customers, and undertake corrective advertising. Negotiated a favorable settlement on behalf of client prior to trial.