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 |
|---|---|---|
| Hudis et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 25-at-937, E.D. Cal. (Oct. 2025) |
Falsely marketing that products improve memory and support healthy brain function, sharper mind, and clearer thinking | Pending |
| Beatty et al. v. Quincy Bioscience Holding Co., Inc. et al. 25-cv-727, S.D.N.Y. (Jan. 2025) |
Falsely marketing that products improve memory and provide cognitive benefits and failing to disclose that the company paid for the clinical studies referenced in marketing materials | Pending |
| 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” | Voluntarily dismissed |
| 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 | Pending |
| 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
