Back to top

Shannon Packaging Prevails Against Caltex's False Advertising Case on Summary Judgment

On May 27, 2015, in Caltex Plastics, Inc. v. Shannon Packaging Co., No. 13-cv-6611, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled in favor of Shannon Packaging on all claims made by Caltex Plastics against Shannon for false advertising under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)) and Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500, and unfair competition under Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200. Caltex asserted that Shannon's use of the phrase "[d]esigned to meet the performance of MIL PRF 81705 T3" constituted false advertising and unfair competition. Senior District Judge Ronald S.W. Lew disagreed, and ruled that Shannon was entitled to summary judgment in its favor against all of Caltex's claims.

Shannon Packaging Co. was represented by Gary M. Anderson and Kenya L. Williams of Fulwider Patton LLP.

Caltex Plastics, Inc. was represented by Fred Fenster of Greenberg Glusker.