An apparent slip-up by a Patton Boggs paralegal last June is continuing to haunt newly-formed Squire Patton Boggs, which must convince a judge this week that it shouldn’t be disqualified from a multibillion-dollar trademark lawsuit that’s already earned the firm more than $12 million in fees.
The underlying case, filed in 2011, pits legacy Squire Sanders clients in the sugar industry against competitors who manufacture high-fructose corn syrup. The sugar company plaintiffs allege that makers of the corn sweetener—represented by Winston & Strawn trial heavyweight Dan Webb—violated the Lanham Act by falsely promoting their product as a natural “corn sugar” that’s nutritionally equivalent to table sugar. The corn syrup makers, including Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Cargill Inc., have counterclaimed that the sugar industry falsely advertises its product as a healthier choice for consumers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
