In CASE 17

In CASE 17.2,XYZ Two Way Radio Service,Inc.v.Uber Technologies,Inc.(2016) ,the court analyzed whether Uber's claims regarding background checks and safety constituted false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act,among other claims.How did the court rule?

A) The court held that Uber's statements were subjective claims that "cannot be proven true or false" and are actionable under the Lanham Act.
B) The court held that Uber's statements that were challenged in the suit were nonactionable puffery under the Lanham Act.
C) The court held that Uber's statements regarding its background checks were false or misleading.
D) The court agreed with XYZ Two Way Radio Service,Inc.'s claims that certain Uber statements constituted false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act.