Court Grants Motion To Dismiss Putative Class Action In Favor Of Client Nature’s Bounty

On March 28, 2023, DTO secured the dismissal with prejudice of a false advertising class action filed in the Eastern District of New York against its client, Nature’s Bounty.

In the case of Baines v. Nature’s Bounty (NY), Inc. et. al., the plaintiff class representative, Mashon Baines, alleged Nature’s Bounty falsely advertised its “fish oil” supplement because the supplements underwent certain processes during manufacture that resulted in the end-product not being “fish oil.” The class was seeking over $5 million in damages.

DTO filed a Motion to Dismiss, primarily arguing federal preemption under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., as amended by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (“NLEA”), 21 U.S.C. § 343 et seq. In short, DTO argued that the FDCA required Nature’s Bounty to use the “common name” of the product, and because the ”common name” of the product was “fish oil” (irrespective of the alleged manufacturing process), any state law that would impose liability on Nature’s Bounty for using the name “fish oil” was preempted.

In January 2023, Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields issued a report and recommendation that the motion to dismiss be granted in full with prejudice. The plaintiffs then filed an objection, which DTO opposed. On March 28, 2023, Judge Joanna Seybert ruled in favor of DTO’s client, adopting the Magistrate’s report and recommendation, and granting the motion to dismiss.

The DTO team consisted of William Delgado, Megan O’Neill and Erik Mortensen.