By Memorandum Order entered by the Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Schering-Plough Healthcare Products, Inc. v. Neutrogena Corporation, Civil Action No. 09-642-SLR (D.Del., June 8, 2011), the Court denied the motion for permanent injunction of plaintiff Schering-Plough Healthcare Products, Inc. (“Schering-Plough”) seeking to enjoin defendant Neutrogena Corporation (“Neutrogena”) from all future use of the helioplex® mark in DEHN-free products. Id. at 8. The Court had previously granted Schering-Plough’s motion for partial summary judgment after finding that the specific challenged advertising of Neutrogena with respect to its “Ultra Sheer Dry-Touch Sunblock SPF 100+” sunscreen (the “100+ Product”) was literally false when the 100+ Product, for a certain period of time, did not contain DEHN. See id. at 2. Although the Court had previously found the challenged advertising of Neutrogena was literally false, the Court later found that the permanent injunction requested by Schering-Plough was not warranted because Schering-Plough failed to articulate any particular injuries, let alone irreparable injury, as a result of Neutrogena’s false advertisements and Schering-Plough’s proposed injunction was too broad. Id. at 4-9.
A complete copy of the Court’s Memorandum Order is attached hereto.