or another’s goods or services; (2) that the statement actually deceives or is likely to deceive a substantial segment of the intended audience; (3) that the deception is material in that it is likely to influence purchasing decisions; (4) that Defendant caused the statement to enter interstate commerce; and (5) that the statement results in actual or probable injury to Plaintiff. Id. at 1348; see also, Cook, Perkiss and Liehe, Inc. v. Northern California Collection Service, Inc. 911 F.2d 242, 244 (9th Cir.1990). In order to withstand a summary judgment motion, there must also be evidence that the injury was “competitive” i.e., that the plaintiffs ability to compete with the defendant was actually harmed. See Halicki v. United Artists Communications Inc., 812 F.2d 1213 (9th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); Barrus v. Sylvania, 55 F.3d 468, 470 (9th
holding that the remedy in a prison conditions case must remedy actual injuries that have been identified by the court and suffered by the plaintiffs holding that section 43a of the lanham act protects trade dress holding that the statute of limitations for all of plaintiffs eleven causes of action including those brought under lanham act  43a 15 usc  1125a and lanham act  43c 15 usc  1125c is four years holding that  43a of the lanham act is confined to remedy injuries to a competitor holding that reasonable anticipation standard for the tort of passing off under section 43a of the lanham act remains the law in the third circuit