Quigley Likely To Prove Gum Tech's Zicam Infringes Its Patent, Judge Finds
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
Quigley Corp. is likely - but not certain - to succeed in its claim of patent infringement against Gum Tech, Philadelphia federal court Judge Stewart Dalzell finds in his April 19 memorandum and order.
You may also be interested in...
NAD dismisses Zicam case
Quigley's use of Gel Tech's submissions to NAD as evidence in its federal court proceeding against Zicam has caused the Council of Better Business Bureaus' National Advertising Division to close its review of Gel Tech's ad claims for Zicam Cold Remedy without issuing a decision. Quigley, the marketer of Cold-Eeze lozenges and challenger of the Zicam claims, violated their confidentiality agreement through its actions, NAD says (1"The Tan Sheet" April 24, p. 8). NAD notes it had "concerns" about whether the claims, including "highly effective cold remedy" and "reduce the duration of the common cold," were adequately supported
NAD dismisses Zicam case
Quigley's use of Gel Tech's submissions to NAD as evidence in its federal court proceeding against Zicam has caused the Council of Better Business Bureaus' National Advertising Division to close its review of Gel Tech's ad claims for Zicam Cold Remedy without issuing a decision. Quigley, the marketer of Cold-Eeze lozenges and challenger of the Zicam claims, violated their confidentiality agreement through its actions, NAD says (1"The Tan Sheet" April 24, p. 8). NAD notes it had "concerns" about whether the claims, including "highly effective cold remedy" and "reduce the duration of the common cold," were adequately supported
NAD dismisses Zicam case
Quigley's use of Gel Tech's submissions to NAD as evidence in its federal court proceeding against Zicam has caused the Council of Better Business Bureaus' National Advertising Division to close its review of Gel Tech's ad claims for Zicam Cold Remedy without issuing a decision. Quigley, the marketer of Cold-Eeze lozenges and challenger of the Zicam claims, violated their confidentiality agreement through its actions, NAD says (1"The Tan Sheet" April 24, p. 8). NAD notes it had "concerns" about whether the claims, including "highly effective cold remedy" and "reduce the duration of the common cold," were adequately supported