Presuming that Company A manages to steer clear of patent infringement, for e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 43(a)(3)(B), provides remedies for unfair methods and practices in commerce.
If, for example, Company A was never intended to actually put any product in the stream of commerce that it previously marketed, and the follow up product does not provide the benefits of the patented invention of Company B, that is arguably fraud, an unfair method or practice. (Company B would have standing, for example, because deceiving consumers and fraudulently selling them a product that was marketed as the patentee’s invention arguably affects commerce in reducing the pool of potential buyers from Company B; other fact patterns may have similar outcomes, too)
Also, many if not most States also have their own false advertising and unfair business practices acts providing slightly different criteria across the country so a suit may include causes of action based on federal and/or one or more states laws in this regard.