DTO Law Secures Dismissal of False Advertising Claims Against Onnit Labs Inc.

DTO Law achieved a significant victory for its client, Onnit Labs Inc., a subsidiary of Unilever, in a putative class action in the Central District of California concerning Onnit’s brain health supplement.

In the case of Ruth Martin v. Onnit Labs Inc. et al., DTO successfully defended Onnit Labs against allegations of false advertising under California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). The lead plaintiff, Ruth Martin, sought to represent a nationwide class and alleged that Onnit’s product, “Alpha Brain,” violated the CLRA by making false claims about its ability to enhance memory, focus, and cognitive processing speed.

DTO moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis that the plaintiff was pursuing an impermissible lack-of-substantiation theory. The court granted DTO’s motion, holding that the scientific studies the plaintiff relied on did not plausibly allege Onnit’s representations about the efficacy of its supplement were false. The plaintiff then dismissed the suit.

The DTO Law team consisted of partner Megan O’Neill and associates Erik Mortensen and Andrea Maddox.

Ruth Martin v. Onnit Labs Inc. et al., Case No.: 2:23-cv-03737-FWS-KES, in the U.S. District Court Central District of California