
Ovulation Test Kits
Allegations: Falsely advertising the accuracy of ovulation test kits
June 2017: A federal judge dismissed the claims in the consolidated action. Some of the claims were dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. while others – including certain claims of fraud – were dismissed When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.. Plaintiffs have until July 13, 2017 to file an amended complaint.
October 2016: A Consolidated Class Action Complaint was filed, which consolidates several lawsuits filed against Theranos. (In re: Arizona THERANOS, INC., Litigation, Case No. 16-cv-2138, D. Ariz.)
May-October 2016: Multiple false advertising class-action lawsuits were filed against Theranos, Inc., a company that sells blood tests conducted using Edison blood testing devices (handheld machines that take blood from a patient’s finger) to individuals at Wellness Centers located in Walgreens Pharmacies. Among other things, the complaints allege that the company markets the tests as being highly accurate, industry leading in quality, and compliant with federal guidelines when, in reality, the Edison machines do not work, the tests are not accurate, and the labs are not compliant with federal regulations and laws.
To read the complaints and learn more about all of the allegations in each of the complaints, click the case information below.
Allegations: Falsely advertising the accuracy of ovulation test kits
Allegations: Falsely marketing that products contain no preservatives when they contain preservative ingredients
Allegations: Marketing products as safe without disclosing that they are contaminated with the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Failing to disclose products contain the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that products were safe when they contain, or were at risk of containing, the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as recyclable
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that products are dishwasher safe and heavy duty
Allegations: Falsely marketing that phenylephrine products treat congestion and other cold and flu symptoms
Allegations: Falsely marketing that phenylephrine products treat congestion and other cold and flu symptoms
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing the products treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely advertising sunscreens as waterproof
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing medicines as decongestants
Allegations: Falsely marketing medicines as nasal decongestants
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines relieve sinus pressure and congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing medicines as treats nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing medicines as nasal decongestants
Allegations: Falsely marketing that phenylephrine products treat congestion and other cold and flu symptoms
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as decongestants
Allegations: Falsely marketing medicines as decongestants
Allegations: Falsely marketing that products treat symptoms of pink eye
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal decongestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing the product as a “treatment” for minor cuts and abrasions without scientific evidence to support such claims
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as if they are more suitable for children when they contain the same formulation as the adult version
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as “Non-Drowsy”
Allegations: Marketing products as safe pain relievers for pregnant women without warning consumers that scientific evidence shows prenatal exposure to APAP can cause neurodevelopmental disorders in children
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing pain relieving lidocaine patches
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products may contain a dangerous substance that increases the risk of serious adverse health consequences and death
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain a harmful substance and may increase the risk of contracting invasive infections
Allegations: Marketing products as ordinary cigarettes when menthol cigarettes are more dangerous and addictive than other types of cigarettes
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing lidocaine pain relieving patches
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing its infants’ product as specifically formulated for infants and different from its Children’s Pain & Fever Acetaminophen Oral Suspension when both medications contain the same amount and…
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as “Maximum Strength” when other products deliver more lidocaine
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing medicines as “non-drowsy” when the active ingredient in them causes drowsiness
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as “fast-release” when they do not work faster than other products marketed as “fast-release”
Allegations: Falsely marketing that the tablets do not contain gelatin when they contain a “notable” amount of gelatin
An FDA panel’s recent findings has led to a flood of lawsuits.
FDA targets companies selling eye drops illegally marketed to treat conditions like pink eye.
Plaintiffs allege packaging misrepresents lidocaine dosages as ‘maximum strength,’ among other things.
Several products marketed as ‘non-drowsy’ contain an ingredient that causes drowsiness, lawsuits claim.
Lawsuits claim infant-specific products aren’t any different than acetaminophen medications for older children.