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

What you should know about this fast cash offer.

Theme park fails to adequately disclose that it’s a “cashless” operation.

Why I’m a fan of this Adidas World Cup ad.

TINA.org joins petition urging FTC to require consent and opt-out for gambling marketing.

Lawsuits takes aim at sports drinks’ superior hydration claim.