Franklin Pierce Law Center v. Georgetown University

How later courts describe this case

• defining puffing as advertising that is “not deceptive for no one would rely on its exaggerated claims”
• applying a Bradley analysis and finding that new substantive provisions of § 43(a) of the Lanham Act should be applied retroactively to a pending case
• “partially incorrect or untrue statements resulting from a failure to disclose a material fact" are actionable under § 43(a)
• although the corporations involved in the suit would be public figures under the traditional Gertz analysis, the Third Circuit declined to make such a finding