Hain Celestial To Pay $7.5M Under Proposed 'Organic' Class-Action Settlement
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Executive Summary
Proposed settlement between Hain and plaintiffs across two related suits will provide refunds to consumers who purchased products in California from the firm's Avalon Organics and JASON personal-care lines before it brought its formulations and labeling claims into compliance with the state's Organic Products Act. It does not cover a separate suit against Hain for alleged misleading "natural" JASON claims.
You may also be interested in...
Babyganics Class Action Explores Issues Central To Organic Deception
Plaintiffs claim the SC Johnson brand’s marketing statements and name are clear attempts to capitalize on consumer demand for organic, but its product formulations fall short of organic standards and “reasonable consumer” expectations. Filed in New York’s Southern District, the proposed class action gets at the heart of issues recently discussed in an FTC/USDA roundtable.
The ‘Organic’ Personal-Care Quandary: Regulators May Lack Essentials To Act
The need for stronger federal oversight over the “organic” personal care segment has been somewhat lost in recent years amid clamoring for action on “natural” claims, but organic deception is still a problem, stakeholders say. However, neither USDA nor the FTC seems entirely equipped or ready to commit to increased involvement, based on discussion at a recent roundtable they held in Washington.
Why Preemption Defense Worked In Recent Neutrogena Suits, But Not Others
Consumer suits seeking changes to, or disclosures in, J&J/Neutrogena sunscreen labeling claims – beyond what FDA requires – are preempted in accordance with the FDA Modernization Act, which Congress intended to promote national regulatory uniformity, a California appellate court has ruled. OTC drug and cosmetic firms, including J&J, have been less successful with preemption arguments in other cases.