Jury Hands Down a Verdict in Prevagen Deceptive Marketing Case
Verdict comes nine years after TINA.org alerted regulator to supplement’s unsubstantiated health claims.
Suero et al. v. NFL, New York Football Giants, Inc., New York Jets, LLC, and MetLife Stadium Company, LLC
22-cv-31, S.D.N.Y.
(Jan. 2022)
New York Jets and New York Giants
Falsely advertising the teams by incorporating New York into their names and merchandise when the franchises were moved to New Jersey decades ago
Falsely advertising the time it takes to travel from New York to MetLife Stadium
Falsely advertising that MetLife Stadium is “the number one stadium in the world” and “sets the standard for venue excellence with state-of-the-art-technology, comfort, and amenities” when the stadium does not have a dome or retractable roof, there are larger stadiums and arenas, and fans had to “cope” with long wait times and cold temperatures when the Superbowl was held at the stadium
Voluntarily dismissed after recommendation from magistrate judge
Verdict comes nine years after TINA.org alerted regulator to supplement’s unsubstantiated health claims.
Regulators have a beef with company’s climate pledge.
Consumers need to be wary of undisclosed incentivized reviews.
Why TINA.org supports FTC’s proposed changes to COPPA Rule but pushes for more.
FTC alleges company pressures consumers into overpaying for its tax filing software.