There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
December 2016: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed.
December 2013: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Basic Research, LLC for allegedly falsely marketing Zantrex-3 weight loss products. Among other things, the plaintiffs claim that the company falsely represents dietary supplements – including Zantrex-3, Zantrex-3 High Energy Fat Burner, and Zantrex-3 Power Crystals – provide things such as “Rapid Weight Loss,” “Rapid Fat Loss,” and “Extreme Energy” without scientific evidence to support such claims. In addition, the plaintiffs claim that the company misleadingly represents the supplements as safe when, according to the complaint, they actually contain a “dangerously large dose of caffeine.” (Brady et al v. Basic Research, LLC, Zoller Labrotories, LLC, Nicole E. Polizzi a/k/a Snooki, Dennis W. Gay, Daniel B. Mowrey, and Mitchell K. Friedlander, Case No. 13-cv-07169, E. D. NY.).
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.