There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
September 2014: The named plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his claims When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.. The class members’ claims were dismissed When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.. The reasons have not been disclosed.
February 2014: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Bluebonnet Nutrition alleging that the company falsely advertises the dietary supplement Betaine Hydrochloride. Among other things, the complaint claims that the company represents that the Betaine HCl (or hydrochloric acid) in the supplement is “an excellent natural vegetarian source of HCl, derived from beets” when, in reality, betaine hydrochloride can only be created synthetically and is not derived from beets. (Kochlani et al v. Bluebonnet Nutrition Corporation a/k/a Bluebonnet, Case No. 14-cv-01539, C. D. CA.).
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
Recent ad shows what it takes to make a comeback.
New research points to “no.”