L’Oréal
TINA.org objected to a settlement that sought to resolve claims filed by the FTC against L’Oréal for deceptively advertising its Lancôme Génifique and L’Oréal Paris Youth Code skincare products by…
In January 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against L’Oreal and Matrix Essentials for allegedly falsely marketing Matrix Biolage Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner, and Pro-Keratin Renewal Spray as containing keratin and providing the benefits of keratin when, in reality, they do not contain any keratin and do not provide the advertised benefits of keratin. (Price et al v. L’Oreal USA, Inc. and Matrix Essentials, LLC, Case No. 17-cv-614, S. D. NY.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding products containing keratin and TINA.org’s coverage of the products, click here.
TINA.org objected to a settlement that sought to resolve claims filed by the FTC against L’Oréal for deceptively advertising its Lancôme Génifique and L’Oréal Paris Youth Code skincare products by…
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that products were safe
Allegations: Misrepresenting that products were safe when they contained, or were at risk of containing, the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Falsely advertising sunscreens as waterproof
Allegations: Falsely marketing the mascara as safe when it contains substances that can be harmful to humans
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing cosmetics as made in France when they are actually manufactured in the United States and Canada
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain ingredients that increase the risk of adverse health effects, including endometriosis, abnormalities in reproductive organs, and various cancers
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain ingredients that increase the risk of adverse health effects, including cancer
Allegations: Misrepresenting products as safe when they contain chemicals that increase the risk of cancer
Allegations: Falsely advertising that products provide protection from the sun for 24 hours
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Falsely advertising face brushes as waterproof
Allegations: Falsely advertising that products “restore [the] skin’s cushion” and “smooth wrinkles” when collagen applied topically does not penetrate skin to provide such benefits
Allegations: Misleadingly stating the amount of product in bottles without disclosing that bottles have defective pumps that fail to dispense significant amounts
In December 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CeraVe and L’Oréal for allegedly falsely advertising CeraVe moisturizing lotions as oil-free when, according to plaintiffs, they do contain oils. (Gruber…
In December 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Maybelline and L’Oréal for allegedly falsely adverting that Maybelline Fit Me Matte + Poreless foundation, Maybelline Fit Me Concealer, and L’Oréal…
September 2020: A federal judge dismissed the complaint concluding that a “simple reading” of the ingredients list and other statements on the product label make it clear that the hair…
August 2019: Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the dismissal order. July 2019: A federal judge dismissed this case concluding that the claims were preempted by federal law and…
In February 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against L’Oréal for allegedly deceptively marketing its liquid cosmetics without disclosing that the bottles have defective pumps that do not dispense a…
May 2019: This action was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. January 2019: A class-action…
In February 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against L’Oréal for allegedly misleadingly marketing that Revitalift® products will affect the structure and function of skin by making unqualified claims that…
January 2018: The Smith case was transferred to the Southern District of Alabama to be consolidated with similar cases. (Smith v. L’Oreal USA, Inc. and Soft Sheen-Carson, LLC, Case No.…
May 2017: This action was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. March 2017: A class-action…
March 2017: Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint making similar allegations (i.e., that the companies do not adequately warn consumers that the Amla relaxer causes injuries, including hair loss and chemical…
February 2017: This action was dismissed because the parties reached a settlement agreement, the terms of which have not been disclosed. November 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against L’Oreal…
July 2014: Upon reaching a settlement agreement, the Leebove case was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the named plaintiffs’ claims and…
July 2014: The parties agreed to dismiss this lawsuit. It was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the plaintiffs and When a…
August 2014: This action was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the named plaintiff and When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice,…
August 2015: This action was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled. because the parties reached a settlement. The settlement…
Happy National Women’s Health Week.
Future squad goal: better #ad disclosure?
Agency gives L’Oréal a get-out-of-jail-free pass with deceptive advertising settlement.
Why TINA.org objects to the FTC’s proposed settlement with L’Oréal over deceptive advertising charges.
Company settles complaint about its gene claims.