Duracell has filed a lawsuit against Energizer in Manhattan federal court on June 13, accusing its rival of false advertising regarding battery life claims in TV and online ads. Duracell alleges Energizer Max's claims of outlasting Duracell Power Boost by 10% are misleading, as they are based on a specific standard for AA batteries and imply superiority over all Duracell products. This is the latest in a series of legal battles between the two battery giants, including past disputes over trademark and advertising claims in Canada and the U.S.
Duracell sues Energizer over battery life claims in high-voltage feud
EnergizerDuracellTrendingU.S. News
AI Summary
TL;DR: Key points with love ❤️Duracell has filed a lawsuit against Energizer in Manhattan federal court on June 13, accusing its rival of false advertising regarding battery life claims in TV and online ads. Duracell alleges Energizer Max's claims of outlasting Duracell Power Boost by 10% are misleading, as they are based on a specific standard for AA batteries and imply superiority over all Duracell products. This is the latest in a series of legal battles between the two battery giants, including past disputes over trademark and advertising claims in Canada and the U.S.
- 1 1973: Duracell began using a pink bunny mascot.
- 2 1989: Energizer began featuring a pink bunny in ad campaigns.
- 3 1992: Duracell retained European rights to the bunny in a deal with Energizer.
- 4 2016: Energizer won a lawsuit against Duracell for using a pink bunny mascot in U.S. stores.
- 5 November 2017: U.S. District judge threw out most of Energizer's claims from the 2016 lawsuit, but left breach of 1992 contract.
- 6 2019-2020: Duracell and Energizer sued each other over performance claims, resolved and dismissed in December 2020.
- 7 2022: Energizer won a seven-year court case against Duracell in a Canadian court regarding packaging claims.
- 8 June 13 (2025): Duracell filed a new complaint against Energizer in Manhattan federal court.
- Duracell seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, lost profits, and an injunction for corrective advertising
- Ongoing legal feud between the two companies
What: Duracell sued Energizer for false advertising regarding battery life claims.
When: June 13 (latest lawsuit filed); 2022 (Energizer won Canadian court case); 2019 and 2020 (previous lawsuits resolved); 2016 (Energizer won lawsuit over pink bunny mascot); 1973 (Duracell began using pink bunny); 1989 (Energizer began featuring pink bunny); 1992 (deal between companies on bunny rights); November 2017 (judge threw out most of Energizer's claims).
Where: Manhattan federal court (U.S.); Canada (Canadian court); United States (for 2016 lawsuit).
Why: Duracell claims Energizer's ads are misleading and cause irreparable harm and lost customer goodwill; Energizer's claims are based on a specific standard but imply general superiority; Energizer seeks to expand market share.
How: Duracell filed a complaint alleging false advertising under federal and New York unfair competition laws; Energizer used TV and online ad campaigns featuring the Energizer Bunny.