Prevagen
TINA.org investigated the marketing of Prevagen, a supplement aimed at people suffering from memory loss, and found that Quincy Bioscience — the marketer and manufacturer of Prevagen — deceptively claimed…
Prevagen
Since 2015, several false advertising class-action lawsuits have been filed against Quincy Bioscience regarding its marketing of Prevagen dietary supplements. More information on each lawsuit is below.
| Case Name (Date) |
Allegations | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Poole et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 24-cv-1578, C.D. Cal. (Feb. 2024) |
Falsely marketing products as “clinically tested” to “improve[] memory” and “support[]: healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking” | Pending |
| Murrow et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 23-cv-14893, N.D. Ill. (Oct. 2023) |
Falsely marketing products as “clinically tested” to improve memory and provide various brain health benefits | Stayed |
| Collins et al. v. Quincy Bioscience, LLC 19-cv-22864, S.D. Fla. (July 2019) |
Falsely advertising that products improve memory and support healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Engert et al. v. Quincy Bioscience, LLC 19-cv-183, W.D. Tex. (Feb. 2019) |
Falsely marketing that products improve memory and support a sharper mind, clearer thinking, and healthy brain function | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Spath et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 18-cv-12416, D.N.J. (Aug. 2018) |
Falsely marketing products as “clinically tested” to improve memory and support healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Vanderwerff et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 17-cv-784, D.N.J. (Feb. 2017) |
Falsely representing products as clinically shown to improve memory and provide other cognitive benefits | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Karathanos et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. 17-cv-1091, E.D.N.Y. (Feb. 2017) |
Falsely marketing products as clinically shown to improve memory and provide other cognitive benefits | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Miloro et al. v. Quincy Bioscience, LLC 16PH-cv01341, Missouri state court (2016) |
Falsely and misleadingly marketing products as improving memory | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
| Musgrave et al. v. Quincy Bioscience, LLC 15-cv-4505, N.D. Cal. (March 2015) |
Falsely advertising products as “Clinically Tested” to improve memory and support healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking | Voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the named plaintiff’s individual claims and When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled. as to the class members’ claims |
| Racies et al. v. Quincy Bioscience, LLC 15-cv-292, N.D. Cal. (Jan. 2015) |
Falsely marketing products as “clinically tested” to improve memory and support healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking | Settled (Final approval granted; Appeal dismissed) |
Legal Action
The Latest
April Fools: How Some Companies Prank Consumers with Common Marketing Terms
These definitions are a joke.
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.
Will Prevagen’s Deceptive Advertising Ever End?
Eight years after TINA.org alerted regulators, supplement ads continue to convey deceptive and misleading memory improvement claims.
Prevagen: The Dismal Facts & Figures that Led to TINA.org’s Objection
Pending class-action settlement leaves consumers behind.
FTC Brain Claims Cases Since 1995
Since 1995, the FTC has brought nearly 70 actions over deceptive brain claims.