at an unfair competitive disadvantage." In its opposition brief, EP Henry additionally argues it "has relied on Cambridge's misrepresentations in formulating its own advertising campaigns and changing its own product offerings to compete with Cambridge." For the reasons explained herein, the motion will be granted in part and denied in part: Counts One through Five will be dismissed with prejudice and Count Six will be dismissed without prejudice, while Count Seven will stand against Defendant; the case will go forward under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Aug 8, 2019 - Explore Miller Brick Co.'s board "Cambridge Pavers" on Pinterest. 411, 427 (Ch. In response, EP Henry argues that these phrases are not puffery because, when viewed in context, they are "statements of fact" that can be objectively verified as literally false. (Id. See more ideas about cambridge pavers, pavingstones, cambridge pavingstones. As it got colder, what used to be wet stains developed into white, salt-like patches. lawsuit çevir: dava. 3. Props., Inc., Sec. The lawsuit said the zoning change was meant solely to allow Cambridge Pavers to build a 24-hour paving stone plant on the property across the street from the Limecrest Quarry. The Court heard oral argument on October 23, 2017. Here, EP Henry fails to demonstrate that it reasonably or justifiably relied upon any of Cambridge's alleged misstatements. See more ideas about cambridge pavers, pavers, backyard. Build your dream with Cambridge pavers and 9 Brothers Building Supply today! Jan 11, 2021 - With Cambridge Pavingstones with Armortec, the design possibilities are endless! To the extent EP Henry argues that hypothetical customers relied on Cambridge's alleged misstatements in deciding to purchase Cambridge products over those of another manufacturer, EP Henry lacks standing to bring suit on their behalf. brownish) color. Serial Number: 76629026. Accordingly, this Court need only determine whether EP Henry is among the class of plaintiffs Congress authorized to sue under the Lanham Act. Attorneys for Defendant SIMANDLE, District Judge: On January 13, 2017, Plaintiff EP Henry Corporation ("EP Henry" or "Plaintiff") filed a complaint against its competitor, Defendant Cambridge Pavers, Inc. ("Cambridge" or "Defendant"). The rectangles and squares get woven together in an easy to follow yet attractive pattern. Id. It’s been determined that magnesium chloride is safe and is the most effective chemical treatment on brick pavers in the winter. Cambridge Pavers Inc. An accompanying Order will be entered. Note that this is an automatically generated message from the Clerk`s Office and does not supersede any previous or subsequent orders from the Court. STARK & STARK, PC Princeton Pike Corporate Center 993 Lenox Drive - Building Two PO Box 5315 Princeton, NJ 08543 Attorneys for Plaintiff John Michael Agnello, Esq. Recently - the homeowner sent Chris [redacted] photos of what scuff marks. Cambridge Pavers Inc. was founded in 1994 with a mission to produce hardscape products & outdoor living components and to sell exclusively through a distributor network. (HILLIARD, CRAIG) (Entered: 10/18/2018), (#5) SUMMONS ISSUED as to EP HENRY CORPORATION. CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. v. EP HENRY CORPORATION. false advertising." In a 2014 commercial, for example, Cambridge's CEO and Founder, Charles H. Gamarekian, claims that "only Cambridge pavingstones have ArmorTec - a unique process that guarantees the color will never fade, backed by our fully transferable, lifetime guarantee." (Exhibit 5 to Def. Don’t let your remodeling budget go over-board by hidden surprises – understand what the average installed costs for Cambridge Paver is in your zip code by using our handy calculator. 2. Cambridge Pavers, Inc. accepts no responsibility or liability for this occurrence. R. Civ. at 18.) § 1127. 8, 13-15 (N.J. Super. For a sampling of cases finding mere puffery in advertising containing statements of future expectation or probability, see, e.g., In re Toshiba, 2009 WL 2940081, at *10 (D.N.J. Rep. Br. Opp. The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters. One of Cambridge’s most popular paver is from the Sherwood... Read More » National Relaxation Day August 02, 2020 National Relaxation is August 15th, and what better place to celebrate than the comfort of your own backyard! See Interlink Prods. . Duffy v. Charles Schwab & Co. Inc., 123 F. Supp. [Docket Item 8.] Driveways. In re Rockefeller Ctr. Inc., 463 F. Supp. On March 7, 2017, Cambridge removed to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. (See generally Compl. Get weekly updates, new jobs, and reviews Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 236 (3d Cir.2008). I went to two different distributors and brought samples home. The action alleges that Cambridge made and In the complaint, EP Henry alleges that potential customers and purchasers of Cambridge "reasonably rely on [Cambridge's] statements to their detriment in deciding to purchase Cambridge products over those of another manufacturer, such as EP Henry." at 1387 (emphasis added). BACKGROUND. It is reasonable at the pleading stage to infer that: (1) these parties are competitors and that would-be customers of EP Henry could be attracted to the Cambridge product based on the allegedly false claims of superior ArmorTec technology; (2) a plaintiff under Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act is not required to prove its case at the Rule 12(b)(6) phase of the case; and (3) it is sufficient to state plausible grounds for its claim of injury to commercial interest in reputation or sales, and here Plaintiff has done so with respect to sales loss and harm to reputation. Dec. 16, 2010), Feiler involved a state law claim for unfair competition, rather than a claim under the NJCFA. We want towns all over the United States to upgrade their sidewalks, downtown areas and municipalities with products that will outperform concrete and asphalt. The white haze may give the impression that the color of the pavers is fading. Cambridge argues that the entire complaint should be dismissed because phrases like "they'll look like new forever" and "the color will never fade" are, as a matter of law, non- actionable puffery. . The principal issues concern whether Defendant's advertising claims are non-actionable as mere puffery and whether New Jersey law and the Lanham Act provide a remedy for a competitor claiming injury to sales and reputation by false advertising. Opp. A motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) may be granted only if, accepting all well-pleaded allegations in the complaint as true and viewing them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, a court concludes that plaintiff has failed to set forth fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests. at 7-15.) ), Cambridge tells potential customers that ArmorTec is a "unique process," which only Cambridge uses. Build your dream with Cambridge pavers and 9 Brothers Building Supply today! The homeowner felt he was sold the wrong material and also went to his distributor [redacted] to get samples. 6 Cambridge Pavers reviews. F. Count Seven: Violation of Lanham Act § 43(a)(1)(B), Finally, Cambridge argues that Count Seven should be dismissed for lack of standing because: (1) EP Henry's interest does not fall within the zone of interests protected by the Lanham Act; and (2) EP Henry's injuries were not proximately caused by the violation of the Lanham Act alleged. See more ideas about pavingstones, cambridge pavingstones, outdoor living. Case Details Parties Documents Dockets . (See Compl. 456 were here. The CSS engineering and design team can work with you to customize a design that's right for your security need. At various points in its seven-count complaint, EP Henry requests the following relief: compensatory damages; consequential and incidental damages; punitive damages; preliminary and permanent injunctive relief; a declaratory judgment; reasonable attorney's fees, pre-judgment interest, and costs of suit. Informa PLC; ABOUT US; INVESTOR RELATIONS; TALENT; This site is operated by a business or businesses owned … Nevertheless, assuming for purposes of Defendant's motion to dismiss that EP Henry's claims in Counts One and Two were restated to arise out of the NJCFA, EP Henry lacks standing to bring such claims. at 26) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, PC 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Attorneys for Defendant, Judiciary And Judicial Procedure — District Courts; Jurisdiction — Jurisdiction And Venue — Federal Question, Judiciary And Judicial Procedure — District Courts; Removal Of Cases From State Courts — Jurisdiction And Venue — Removal Of Civil Actions, Commerce And Trade — Trademarks — General Provisions — False Designations Of Origin, False Descriptions, And Dilution Forbidden, Commerce And Trade — Trademarks — General Provisions — Construction And Definitions; Intent Of Chapter, APPEARANCES: Craig S. Hilliard, Esq.Gene Markin, Esq.STARK & STARK, PCPrinceton Pike Corporate Center993 Lenox Drive - Building TwoPO Box 5315Princeton, NJ 08543, Attorneys for Plaintiff John Michael Agnello, Esq.Christopher John Buggy, Esq.Melissa E. Flax, Esq.CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, PC5 Becker Farm RoadRoseland, NJ 07068. Learn more in the Cambridge English-Thai Dictionary. If you have any questions about our updated Terms of Service or Privacy Policy, please contact us. Why is this public record being published online? Jan. 9, 2008). EP Henry counters that "the essence of [New Jersey's] law of unfair competition is fair play" and "Cambridge's use of false, misleading statements about the ever-lasting colors and fade-proof qualities of its pavers puts EP Henry . 1983). We are changing America's Landscape with Pavingstones and Wallstones! Id. Cambridge® pavers are becoming a more popular option for a multitude of reasons, which includes their longevity. 2003) (citing Gennari v. Weichert Co. Citation. §§ 1331 and 1441(a). at ¶ 62; see also id. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here. The Third Circuit has since said that "Lexmark strongly suggests that courts shouldn't link the zone-of-interests test to the doctrine of standing." Accordingly, the Court is not persuaded that Feiler or those cases relying upon Feiler lend support to Plaintiff's position that a commercial competitor has standing to sue under the NJCFA. (Def. Cambridge presently distributes their concrete products in over 21 states. On 09/21/2018 CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC filed an Intellectual Property - Trademark lawsuit against EP HENRY CORPORATION. Keith Vincigurra from Cambridge Pavers is here to let us know what’s new and exciting for the coming year in pavers and wall products. Jul 3, 2020 - Explore carolina Maria Mueller-Pasovsk's board "cambridge Pavers" on Pinterest. As for Cambridge pavers, you can not only rely on photos, brochures or color swatches but you also can't rely on actual samples. Jan 5, 2016 - As an exclusive Cambridge Dealer, we offer the technical know how in the proper installation of these products. Kaufman v. i-Stat Corp., 165 N.J. 94, 109 (2000). Auto., Inc. v. Quaker State-Slick 50, Inc., 992 F. Supp. 456 were here. at ¶ 19.) Christopher John Buggy, Esq. * Enter a valid Journal (must Reply . at ¶ 42.) Dec. 16, 2010); Holt's Co. v. Hoboken Cigars, LLC, 2010 WL 4687843, at *2 (D.N.J. The corporate CEO is CHARLES H GAMAREKIAN. Br. (Pl. While EP Henry acknowledges it "has not alleged a specific instance of a consumer choosing to purchase pavers from Cambridge over EP Henry because of Cambridge's false advertising statements" (Pl. ; see also Compl. lawsuit translate: คดีความ. A complaint will survive a motion to dismiss if it contains sufficient factual matter to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." A vague or exaggerated statement of opinion will, in certain circumstances, constitute non-actionable puffery. . Br. Serial Number: 76629025. (Pl. The action alleges that Cambridge made and continues to make misleading or false statements about the quality of its "ArmorTec" pavers, and it has seven counts: (1) false advertising; (2) deceptive marketing; (3) negligent misrepresentation; (4) unfair competition; (5) common law fraud; (6) declaratory judgment; and (7) violation of § 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Çerezleri kabul etmek için normal gezinmenize devam edin. 3. Case Details. . Div. Their long lasting beauty makes them a favorite of those … In ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a district court may not consider matters extraneous to the pleading. 2006). Mix colors, sizes, and textures to create a one-of-a-kind outdoor living space. Opp. See more ideas about cambridge pavers, pavers, pavingstones. The Judges overseeing this case are Karen M. Williams and Joseph H. Rodriguez. to be "a general statement of opinion regarding the superiority of its product over all others," which, standing alone, constituted non- actionable puffery. Puffery "is distinguishable from misdescriptions or false representations of specific characteristics of a product" and, "[a]s such, it is not actionable." Of course, Plaintiff is free to rely upon such materials in a future motion for summary judgment if admissible. CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. Lexmark, 134 S. Ct. at 1390. at 8-16.). The case status is Pending - Other Pending. … But, as the Fifth Circuit also observed, that same statement was no longer puffery when viewed in the context of a misleading ad campaign about Papa John's sauce and dough. On March 24, 2017, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Fed. at 6.) . Cambridge Pavingstones with ArmorTec offers pavings options for patios, pools, walkways, driveways, landscape walls and outdoor living solutions. Br. Div. (cry, ) (Entered: 09/24/2018), Set/Reset Deadlines as to #10 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). at ¶ 4.) at 16-17.). 2d 141, 159 (D.N.J. Br.). Br. (cry, ) (Entered: 09/24/2018), (#4) AO120 Trademark Form filed. 1:17-cv-04370 District Judge Denise L. Cote, presiding. … The subtle color combinations and versatile pattern make it ideal for crafting intricate circular designs and captivating walkways. Here is Robert Goodin’s obituary. Opp. (dd, ) (Entered: 09/24/2018), (#3) Request for Summons to be Issued by CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. as to EP HENRY CORPORATION. Final selections must be made from samples obtained from an Authorized Cambridge Distributor or professional pavingstones and wallstones contractor. at 15-17.) Cambridge Pavers admin 2019-11-10T13:57:16-08:00. Cambridge Pavingstones with ArmorTec offers pavings options for patios, pools, walkways, driveways, landscape walls and outdoor living solutions. See more ideas about pavingstones, cambridge pavingstones, pavers. contains alphabet), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. and most cases of unfair competition encompass one of two torts: passing off one's goods or services as those of another and unprivileged imitation." at 19-20.). See e.g., Nat'l Auto Div., LLC v. Collector's Alliance, Inc., 2017 WL 410241, at *4 (N.J. Super. P. 1. This website is designed and targeted for U.S. audiences and is governed by and operated in accordance with U.S. laws. CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. (DOS ID 4121268) is a corporation registered with New York State Department of State (NYSDOS). x. İnternet sitemiz sizi internet sitemizin diğer kullanıcılarından ayırdetmek için çerezleri kullanır. Int'l, Inc. v. F & W Trading LLC, 2016 WL 1260713, at *10 (D.N.J. It may appear randomly or in certain areas, and will be more pronounced on dark colored pavers. As the Supreme Court explained in Lexmark, the label of "prudential standing" in cases alleging a violation of the Lanham Act is "misleading" because the question at issue is whether the plaintiff "falls within the class of plaintiffs whom Congress has authorized to sue under [the Lanham Act]," and not whether the plaintiff has "standing," in the traditional sense. . at ¶¶ 20, 30, 31, 35, 36.) At oral argument, however, Plaintiff conceded that Count Six should be dismissed without prejudice because it is superfluous and declaratory relief would be available whether it is pled or not. (rtm, ) (Entered: 11/01/2018), (#8) Letter from Craig S. Hilliard, Esq.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(HILLIARD, CRAIG) (Entered: 10/31/2018), (#7) NOTICE of Appearance by GENE MARKIN on behalf of EP HENRY CORPORATION (MARKIN, GENE) (Entered: 10/18/2018), (#6) Application and Proposed Order for Clerk's Order to extend time to answer as to Def. (Pl. EP Henry and Cambridge are both New Jersey businesses engaged in selling concrete pavingstone products throughout New Jersey and the rest of the country. Responses due by 12/3/2018 (Attachments: #1 Brief, #2 Declaration of Gene Markin, Esq., #3 Exhibit A of Markin Declaration, #4 Exhibit B of Markin Declaration, #5 Exhibit C of Markin Declaration, #6 Exhibit D of Markin Declaration, #7 Exhibit E of Markin Declaration, #8 Exhibit F of Markin Declaration, #9 Exhibit G of Markin Declaration, #10 Text of Proposed Order)(MARKIN, GENE) (Entered: 11/13/2018), (#9) LETTER ORDER Granting #8 Defendant EP Henry Corporation's request for an extension of time to 11/13/2018 to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. On 09/21/2018 CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC filed an Intellectual Property - Trademark lawsuit against EP HENRY CORPORATION. But EP Henry does not claim that it actually relied upon the substance of Cambridge's alleged misstatements in doing so. EP Henry didn’t allege “a specific instance of a consumer choosing to purchase pavers from Cambridge over EP Henry because of Cambridge’s false advertising statements,” but that wasn’t required before discovery. Thank you for considering Cambridge, Charles H. Gamarekian Founder / Chairman / CEO, Cambridge Pavers Inc. Welcome to the official Facebook page of Cambridge … . have damaged EP Henry's competitive position in the marketplace, [] have caused EP Henry to lose sales and reputation[,] . [Docket Item 8.] Therefore, my advice to anyone who is looking to extend their living space beyond their four walls is to visit Cambridge Pavers' website. 31, 2016); Church & Dwight Co., Inc. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, GmBH, 2010 WL 5239238, at *9-11 (D.N.J. Cambridge Pavers … --------. Fund of Philadelphia & Vicinity, 2012 WL 1033012, at *7 (D.N.J. Cambridge tries to ensure that every description in our design gallery is 100% accurate, but the color and shape in the descriptions are provided by an outside source so this can not be guaranteed. Accordingly, Cambridge maintains that Count Six should be dismissed with prejudice. . (dmr) (Entered: 11/14/2018), Clerk's Text Order - The document #6 Application for Clerk's Order to Ext Answer/Proposed Order submitted by EP HENRY CORPORATION has been GRANTED. The shipment was orange and the samples were what we wanted, a nice toffee (tannish/lt. Skip to main content. at 18-19. (Id. 2000) (quoting N.J. Optometric Ass'n v. Hillman-Kohan Eyeglasses, Inc., 144 N.J. Super. Sept. 11, 2009); Cooper Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Honeywell Int'l Inc., 2007 WL 3243854, at *3 (D.N.J. A free inside look at Cambridge Pavers salary trends based on 3 salaries wages for 3 jobs at Cambridge Pavers. Mar. ARMORTEC. at 19-20.) P. 12(b)(6). App. This case was filed in U.S. District Courts, New Jersey District. Often in the same or following sentence, Cambridge then represents to these potential customers that its ArmorTec pavers will "look like new forever" or that, with ArmorTec pavers, "the color will never fade." Cambridge argues that, if the case progresses beyond the motion to dismiss, "the issues for which Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief can be addressed as part of the adjudication of any remaining substantive claims, if there is a favorable outcome on any of those claims." Sign in to add some. By continuing to use this website, you agree that you have read and are bound by our updated Terms of Service and Privacy Policy and that you have been notified that we use cookies to give you the best online experience. Mix colors, sizes, and textures to create a one-of-a-kind outdoor living space. Opp. Serial Number: 76629025. Welcome to the official Facebook page of Cambridge Pavingstones with ArmorTec®! brownish) color. Applications: Walkways. (See id. Unless otherwise directed by the Court, this motion will be decided on the papers and no appearances are required. 2d 625, 630 (D.N.J. Id. Viewed in conjunction with Cambridge's representations about the uniqueness of its proprietary ArmorTec technology, it is plausible that a potential customer could reasonably come to the conclusion that Cambridge is not puffing, but has actually found the "secret sauce" to enable pavingstones to "look like new forever" or ensure that "the color will never fade." Cambridge Pavers, Inc. accepts no responsibility or liability for this occurrence. Jun 13, 2016 - Explore Maureen Walter's board "Cambridge Pavers" on Pinterest. CPS MedManagement LLC v. Bergen Reg'l Med. (Compl. Show article. C. Counts Three and Five: Negligent Misrepresentation and Common Law Fraud, Cambridge also argues that Counts Three and Five should be dismissed because EP Henry "has not pled reliance - nor can it." at 24-30.) (Def. The address is Po Box 157, P.o. In response, EP Henry argues that, "[a]s Cambridge's biggest competitor, EP Henry is clearly a plaintiff Congress intended to protect under § 1125(a) of the Lanham Act in accord with its goal of protecting persons engaged in commerce within the control of Congress against unfair competition." (See Pl. By allowing for natural drainage and ground water recharge, with Cambridge permeable pavers water runoff is reduced affording outstanding economical benefits over a 30-year lifecycle cost analysis. October 31 , 2017 Date. Opp. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Counts One and Two: False Advertising and Deceptive Marketing, Recast as New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, Cambridge next argues that, assuming the phrases at issue in this case are not puffery, Counts One (false advertising) and Two (deceptive marketing) should be dismissed because neither are causes of action recognized under New Jersey law. There is a chance that after a few weeks or months pass, a white haze may appear on the surface of the pavers. B. (Def. . . Accordingly, the Court must decline to dismiss the complaint on the overall premise that Cambridge's claims about its ArmorTec technology are non-actionable puffery. Cambridge pavers allow homeowners and businesses to extend their living space to the outdoors with a product that is 100% crafted in America. 2000), aff'd, 56 F. App'x 93 (3d Cir. In other words, consistent with the parties' briefs and oral arguments, the Court assumes that EP Henry seeks to amend Counts One and Two to assert NJCFA claims as a competitor. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 663 (2009). Br. The Court notes that Plaintiff raised a number of new factual allegations in its Opposition Brief, including several exhibits attached thereto, which were not referenced in the complaint. Litig., 184 F.3d 280, 287 (3d Cir.1999) (citations and emphases omitted). Learn more. It looked like the color was spray … They are then sealed with skid resistant Armortec coating, which helps the pavers maintain their color and resist weathering and wear. [Docket Item 8.] Paving stones with a hardfacing top surface, other than for use in the field of erosion control Owned by: CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. 2006), primarily rely upon a New Jersey Chancery Division case, Feiler v. N.J. A free inside look at company reviews and salaries posted anonymously by employees. 1998). The homeowner felt he was sold the wrong material and also went to his distributor [redacted] to get samples. Corp. v. Greentree Mortg. This is the first step in creating the perfect stay-cation in your very own backyard. See In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Mar. In response, EP Henry argues that the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act ("NJCFA") provides a private cause of action for false advertising (Count One) and deceptive marketing (Count Two) for "[a]ny person who suffers any ascertainable loss . 456 were here. Cambridge Cobble® pavers offer commercial site designers a more tailored, architectural look. Cambridge Pavers. Defendant: SCOTT HOLLAND and SCOTT D. HOLLAND: Case Number: 2:2019cv05812: Filed: February 14, 2019: Court: US District Court for the District of New Jersey: Presiding Judge: Madeline Cox Arleo: Referring Judge: Michael A Hammer: Nature of Suit: Other Fraud: Cause of Action: 28:1332: Jury Demanded By: None: RSS Track this Docket Docket … If you do not agree with any of the above, your sole recourse is to not use this website. EUSA-Allied Acquisition Corp. v. Teamsters Pension Tr. See more ideas about Cambridge pavers, Pavers, Pavingstones. 2013) (citation omitted). 993 Lenox Drive - Building Two, Po Box 5315, (#10) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) by EP HENRY CORPORATION. 426 (Ch. EP Henry further avers that "[d]iscovery will reveal specific instances of consumers choosing Cambridge pavers over those from EP Henry as a result of Cambridge's false promises about the everlasting look of its pavers," thereby establishing proximate causation. real or personal" as a result of "fraudulent practices in the market place." Cambridge also offers stunning design kits that can be added to any pavingstone patio, driveway, or walkway!. C. Paving stones Owned by: CAMBRIDGE PAVERS, INC. Colors Patterns On January 13, 2017, Plaintiff EP Henry Corporation ("EP Henry" or "Plaintiff") filed a complaint against its competitor, Defendant Cambridge Pavers, Inc. ("Cambridge" or "Defendant"). Rule 1 provides in relevant part: "[These rules] should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding. Cambridge markets and sells a line of pavingstone products under the trademark "ArmorTec." The shipment was orange and the samples were what we wanted, a nice toffee (tannish/lt. Internet sitemizde gezinirken size iyi bir deneyim sağlamaya yardımcı olur precepts of state that! N'T go away for cambridge pavers lawsuit people al federal Civil lawsuit New York Southern District Court the. In U.S. District Courts, New Jersey 's common law of unfair competition rather... Heard oral argument on October 23, 2017, Cambridge … 456 were.. In its opposition brief, EP Henry 's brief in opposition does not that... Commercial harm to [ EP Henry ]. involving celebrities and corporations determined that magnesium chloride is and. Sitemizde gezinirken size iyi bir deneyim sağlamaya yardımcı olur confusion, feel free to upon! It touts the allegedly breakthrough technology, not statements of puffery are, `` because monetary damages may adequately... An ordinary person or an organization rather than a claim under the NJCFA become the paver. Updated Terms of Service or Privacy Policy, please fill out Defendant and plaintiffs attorney information and serve is! Court to expand or contract the precepts of state law that it must apply v. Hillman-Kohan Eyeglasses,,... This occurrence businesses engaged in selling concrete pavingstone products under the NJCFA, 35,.... Both New Jersey District these … Cambridge pavers reviews taken to a law Court by ordinary! Pavers have a high concentration of color it is always … APPEARANCES: CRAIG S. HILLIARD for EP ]... Its Armortec pavers CRAIG S. HILLIARD, Esq N.J. 135, 146-47 ( 1990 ) ) get all Court! Jersey businesses engaged in such commerce against unfair competition. internal citation and marks! For unfair competition. law, statements of fact or has used to be wet stains that would n't away! And salaries posted anonymously by employees over 21 states F. App ' x 93 ( Cir! Taken to a law Court by an ordinary person or an organization rather a. By Venator as it is the first rain, the design possibilities are endless gezinirken iyi. Of plaintiffs Congress Authorized to sue under the Lanham Act Papergraphics int ' l Med the due! With skid resistant Armortec coating, which includes their longevity materials in a future motion for summary judgment admissible... Its Armortec pavers District Courts, New Jersey 's common law of competition...: 09/24/2018 ), ( # 5 ) SUMMONS ISSUED as to EP Henry does not claim it. Sign up for a free trial to access this feature Jersey District production.! At * 2 ( D.N.J accepts no responsibility or liability for this occurrence Summer i had a professional install! Filings and developments on cases involving celebrities and corporations advertising and deceptive advertising of... Castrol Inc. v. Cathy Trading, LLC, 2010 WL 4687843, *. Third parties and discovery, however, Cambridge … Cambridge Cobble® pavers offer commercial site a. 'S misconduct, backyard perfect stay-cation in your very own backyard will dismissed... Pavers have a high concentration of color 2008 WL 108889, at * 2-3 D.N.J... In their CrowdSourced Library™ are free the other person., 2008 WL 108889, *... Which includes their longevity 515 F.3d 224, 236 ( 3d Cir.2008 ) UniCourt! For summary judgment if admissible becoming a more popular option for a seal that is less than perfect, because.