St. Ives Apricot Scrubbed Of Class Action Alleging Harm From Walnut Shells
Federal judge says plaintiffs “have at best shown that St. Ives Scrub could, in theory, alter the skin’s surface.” Drug and device law attorney says the complaint "is not really a labeling issue” and the court applied “a healthy dose of common sense” in ruling.
You may also be interested in...
The FDA is focused on driving adoption of more sensitive, standardized testing methods for assessing cosmetic talc purity, which it believes would yield more consistent results across labs. This would help to inform research into the health implications of trace levels of asbestos and other elongate mineral particles in talc; in the interim it could to be damaging to companies that supply or use that talc.
In April 2017, Unilever failed to dismiss a putative class action in California’s Central District alleging that its St. Ives Apricot Scrub is unfit for sale due to the potential of its crushed walnut shells to cause “microtears” in skin. Now the firm seeks summary judgment in the matter, maintaining that plaintiffs are relying on “junk science” to assert the possibility of a made-up medical condition.
St. Ives owner lays into a putative class action denouncing the brand’s Apricot Scrub as “completely worthless” and suggesting that it damages users’ skin, contrary to claims. According to Unilever’s motion for dismissal, the plaintiffs have styled a product liability complaint as a false advertising suit in order to recover damages for a nationwide class of purchasers, but lack standing and plausibility in their claims.