While the court concluded the record could support the inference that Baby Jogger’s inaction was misleading, noting that the eight-year period of inactivity was “certainly stretching the limits,” it declined to hold that the conduct was misleading as a matter of law.
While the court concluded the record could support the inference that Baby Jogger’s inaction was misleading, noting that the eight-year period of inactivity was “certainly stretching the limits,” it declined to hold that the conduct was misleading as a matter of law.