Case 3:25-cv-06162-JSC Document 71 Filed 11/10/25 Page 2 of 13
(Dkt. No. 35 at 2.) 1 As to the Lanham Act claim, Plaintiffs request an injunction preventing
1
Kalshi “from marketing its sports contracts as ‘legal in all 50 states’ or any variation of that phrase
2
or similar representation regarding the nationwide legality of these gaming contracts .” (Dkt. No.
3
35 at 2.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. Plaintiff s have not
4
shown a likelihood of success on the merits for either claim.
5
DISCUSSION
6
A party seeking a preliminary injunction must establish “(1) that he is likely to succeed on
7
the merits, (2) that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, (3)
8
that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest.”
9
Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008).
10
Here, Plaintiffs have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits on either claim. First,
11
under the Lanham Act, Plaintiffs have not identified a false or misleading advertisement. Second,
12
Plaintiffs’ IGRA claim fails because the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act
13
(“UIGEA”) and the Commodity Exchange Act, and not IGRA, govern Kalshi’s event contracts,
14
and the Court does not have jurisdiction to decide whether the event contracts violate the
15
Commodity Exchange Act.
16
I.
Lanham Act Claim
17
“The Lanham Act creates a cause of action for unfair competition through misleading
18
advertising or labeling. Though in the end consumers also benefit from the Act's proper
19
enforcement, the cause of action is for competitors, not consumers.” POM Wonderful LLC v.
20
Coca-Cola Co. , 573 U.S. 102, 107 (2014). A violation of the Lanham Act requires:
21
22
(1) a false statement of fact by the defendant in a commercial advertisement about its own or another's product; (2) the statement actually deceived or has the tendency to deceive a substantial segment of its audience; (3) the deception is material, in that it is likely to influence the purchasing decision; (4) the defendant caused its false statement to enter interstate commerce; and (5) the plaintiff has been or is likely to be injured as a result of the false statement, either by direct diversion of sales from itself to defendant or by lessening of the goodwill
23
24
25
26
27
1 Record citations are to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents.
28
2
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs