Literal falsity about independence of tests/test results supports $18 million in disgorgement (incl. interest)

Dyson, Inc. v. SharkNinja Operating LLC, 2019 WL 1454509, No. 14 C 9442 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2019)Dyson sued SharkNinja in 2014 for false advertising.  SharkNinja won summary judgment except for Dyson’s literal falsity claim for the period from August 2014 through December 2014. A jury returned a general verdict finding SharkNinja liable and that its false advertising was willful, and awarding Dyson an accounting of SharkNinja’s profits: $16,410,681. The court granted prejudgment interest, adding a couple of million to the tab, and denied SharkNinja’s various motions to get out of the verdict as well as Dyson’s motion for attorneys’ fees.The key claims were that independent lab tests conducted under the ASTM F608 standard proved that SharkNinja’s NV650 vacuum cleaned carpets better than Dyson’s DC65 vacuum. Dyson had two theories of literal falsity: first, that the tests weren’t independent, and second, that part a SharkNinja…

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law posts –

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply