Prevagen Dietary Supplements

December 2020: The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to pay filing and docketing fees.

November 2020: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. Later in November, an objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the decision to approve the settlement agreement.

October 2020: TINA.org filed an amicus curiae brief opposing the terms of the proposed settlement agreement as unfair to consumers. To read the brief or learn about the issues raised by TINA.org, click here.

July 2020: A federal judge preliminarily approved the settlement agreement. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for November 17, 2020.

June 2020: Plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of a settlement agreement that would provide class members with a 30 percent cash refund of the company’s suggested retail price for Prevagen products. Class members with proof of purchase may receive a maximum award of $70 while class members without proof of purchase may receive a maximum award of $12. The company also agreed to stop marketing that Prevagen improves memory without adequate scientific evidence to support such claims or qualifying the advertising claim with a disclaimer. This settlement would resolve seven lawsuits: Collins, Engert, Karanthos, Racies, Spath, and Vanderwerff, as well as one state case Miloro v. Quincy Bioscience.

August 2019: The case was transferred to the Southern District of New York. (Case No. 17-cv-1091, S.D.N.Y.)

February 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Quincy Bioscience for allegedly deceptively marketing Prevagen dietary supplements as clinically shown to improve memory and provide other cognitive benefits when such claims are false. (Karathanos et al v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Company, Inc. et al, Case No. 17-cv-1091, E.D.N.Y.)

For more information about the marketing of Prevagen and TINA.org’s coverage of the product, click here.