Aspercreme Pain Relief Patch

Cruz et al v. Sanofi US Corp.
21-cv-5536, N.D. Cal.
(May 2021)

Making misleading pain relief claims

Misleadingly marketing the product as “Max Strength” when other products deliver more lidocaine and are more effective

Misleadingly marketing the patch as “fast acting” when it does not provide immediate pain relief

Falsely claim that the product provides 12 hours of relief when the patch does not stay on for even six hours

Falsely marketing the product as compliant with FDA regulations when it is not

Pending

See how you stack up.

Aspercreme

TINA.org investigates after doctor challenges pain reliever’s “clinically proven” labeling claim on Twitter.

NAD tells marketer to watch its mouth when it comes to making certain dry mouth product claims.