06/04/2026
Tenth Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment in False Advertising Dispute Between Home Inspector Associations
American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. v. International Association of Certified Home Inspectors, No. 21-1087 (10th Cir. June 14, 2022) The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld a district court's decision granting summary judgment to the American Society of Home Inspectors (ASHI) in a Lanham Act false advertising case brought by the International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (InterNACHI).
ASHI and InterNACHI are the two largest national organizations serving home inspectors. Both provide member benefits such as educational resources, marketing support, and professional development opportunities in exchange for membership dues. ASHI offers several membership levels, including associate, inspector, and certified inspector. Individuals may join as associates without meeting professional qualification requirements, while higher membership classifications require examinations and a specified number of completed inspections. ASHI also requires continuing education for long-term members and promotes all members through its online inspector directory. InterNACHI offers similar services but does not advertise inexperienced inspectors on its website.
The dispute arose after ASHI filed a defamation action against InterNACHI and its founder. In response, InterNACHI asserted a counterclaim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, alleging that ASHI's slogan, "Educated. Tested. Verified. Certified.," was misleading because not every ASHI member satisfied all of those descriptions. The district court ultimately entered summary judgment in favor of ASHI on the false advertising claim.
On appeal, InterNACHI argued that sufficient evidence existed for a jury to conclude that ASHI's slogan caused competitive harm. The Tenth Circuit disagreed. The court explained that a plaintiff pursuing a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act must establish an injury to its commercial interests or business reputation that was proximately caused by the challenged statement.
According to the court, InterNACHI failed to present evidence demonstrating such harm. The consumer survey evidence did not address whether the slogan influenced inspectors to join ASHI rather than InterNACHI. Likewise, evidence showing growth in ASHI's associate membership did not establish that InterNACHI lost members or suffered any competitive injury. The court also found that a conclusory affidavit from InterNACHI's president, unsupported by factual evidence, was insufficient to create a genuine dispute regarding damages or reputational harm.
InterNACHI further contended that harm should be presumed because the organizations compete for members. The court rejected that argument, noting that competition alone does not automatically justify a presumption of injury. The court emphasized that home inspectors may belong to both organizations simultaneously, meaning that an increase in ASHI membership would not necessarily correspond to a loss for InterNACHI.
Because the record lacked evidence showing actual or likely commercial injury resulting from the slogan, the court concluded that no reasonable jury could find in InterNACHI's favor. As a result, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for ASHI.
