IcyHot Patch

Fuller et al v. Chattem, Inc.
21-cv-5436, N.D. Cal.
(April 2021)

IcyHot Patch

Making misleading pain relief claims

Misleadingly marketing the product as “Max Strength Lidocaine” 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 claiming that the product provides 12 hours of pain relief when it does not stay on for even six hours

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

Pending

Toddler Formulas

These marketing claims have experts throwing a tantrum.

Some members of Congress want to kill a popular “click-to-cancel” rule.

How much does this monthly book subscription actually cost?

Companies should not be able to trap consumers into subscriptions that they do not want.

Getting out may not be as easy as signing up.