Topic Archives: False Advertising

Ninth Circuit Affirms No Private Right of Action to Enforce Lack of Substantiation Claims in SeroVital False Advertising Class Action Case

The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s unfair competition law and consumer legal remedies claims, finding that neither claim provided plaintiff with a private cause of action to enforce the substantiation provisions of California’s unfair competition and consumer protection law.  See Kwan v. SanMedica International, No. 15-15496. Background of the Case.  ...›

Affirmed

Speaking Engagement: False Advertising Class Actions – Practitioner’s Guide to Class Certification, Damages and Trial

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:00 pm, Morrison & Foerster partner Purvi Patel will be presenting at The Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) CLE program “False Advertising Class Actions – Practitioner’s Guide to Class Certification, Damages and Trial.” Ms. Patel and her fellow panelists will discuss new developments and tips regarding prosecuting, defending ...›

Judge Koh Issues First Blow to “Added Sugars” Plaintiffs

The Big Picture:  On Tuesday, Judge Koh granted Kellogg’s Motion to Dismiss in its entirety in Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Company, No. 5:16-cv-04955-LHK (N.D. Cal.).  Hadley is one of three cases[1] against well-known cereal makers pending in the Northern District of California.  All three actions challenge various factually true “health” representations on the cereal packaging ...›

Ginkgo

District Court Sacks Ginkgo Biloba False Advertising Case

On February 2, 2017, the Central District of California terminated a false advertising lawsuit against Schwabe North America, Inc. and Nature’s Way Products, LLC (Defendants), based on allegations that the companies misrepresented the cognitive benefits of two Ginkgo biloba products. The court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, finding that Plaintiff Kathleen Sonner (Plaintiff) had failed to establish that the claimed memory benefits were provably false. ...›

The Latest Word (or Text) on TCPA Standing Post-Spokeo and Consent

On January 30, 2017, in Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group, No. 14-55980, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) plaintiff had sufficiently alleged an Article III injury-in-fact, under the United States Supreme Court’s Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins decision.  The Ninth Circuit ultimately affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendants, holding that the plaintiff had consented to receiving text messages from a gym by providing his phone number with his membership application and had not revoked that consent simply by cancelling the gym membership. ...›

Flame

Ninth Circuit and “Ascertainability”: No “Administratively Feasible” Method of Identifying Class Members Required

On January 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to grant class certification, finding that, at the class certification stage, Rule 23 does not require plaintiffs to demonstrate that there is an administratively feasible way to determine who is in the putative class. ...›

November 23, 2016False Advertising, FTC

Court Issues $29 Million Judgment Against Pure Green Coffee Weight-Loss Pills in FTC Deceptive Advertising Suit

On November 2, 2016, a Florida Federal District Court issued a $29 million judgment against the marketer of Pure Green Coffee extract weight-loss pills in a deceptive advertising suit brought by the Federal Trade Commission. District Court Judge Steven Mayberry of the Middle District of Florida ordered defendant Nicholas Congleton to disgorge $29 million in ...›

Berries
October 3, 2016False Advertising, Food Misbranding

A Berry Mixed Decision: Consumer Class Action Challenging Packaging of “Himalania” Goji Berries Largely Survives Motion to Dismiss

On September 2, 2016, United States District Judge Dean P. Pregerson for the Central District of California granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss a class action complaint alleging violations of the UCL and CLRA against defendants that market and sell “Himalania” brand goji berries. Torrent v. Thierry Ollivier et al., No. 2:15-cv-02511 DDP (JPRx), Dkt. No. 76. The court held ...›