Coppertone Sunscreen Class Action Lawsuit Calls SPF Claims Deceptive

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

A new class action lawsuit accuses Merck & Co. Inc. of tricking consumers into paying more for Coppertone sunscreen products with an SPF of 55 to 100+, even though they allegedly contain “virtually identical active ingredients as the Coppertone SPF 50 Products” which costs less.

Plaintiff Danika Gisvold alleges in the Coppertone sunscreen class action lawsuit that “Merck has consistently conveyed the message to consumers throughout the United States, including California, that the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection provides superior UVB protection compared to comparable lower SPF valued products, including the Coppertone SPF 50 Products. They do not.”

The truth, according to Gisvold, is that “none of the sunscreen products in the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection provide any additional clinical benefit over the Coppertone SPF 50 Products.”

Merck’s superior UVB protection claims are “false, misleading and deceptive,” the Coppertone sunscreen class action lawsuit says.

There are allegedly two material differences between the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection and the Coppertone SPF 50 products, namely: (1) the SPF valued; and (2) the price.

In June 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed a regulation governing the labeling of sunscreen products that would cap SPF values at “SPF 50+” because there is insufficient data to establish that products with SPF values higher than 50 would provide additional clinical benefit. This proposal is in line with other countries, including Australia and the European Union that have imposed similar SPF labeling restrictions “to reduce consumer confusion,” the Coppertone class action lawsuit says.

The Coppertone class action lawsuit stresses that scientific studies establish that there is no added clinical benefit associated with SPF values over 50. Despite this, Merck allegedly continues to claim that the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collections provides superior UVB protection and sells the products for a premium price.

Because of this, the Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members “have been damaged by their purchases of the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection and have been deceived into purchasing products that they believed, based on Merck’s representations, provide superior UVB protection compared to less expensive, comparable lower valued SPF products.”

The Plaintiff is accusing Merck of allegedly reaping enormous profits from its false marketing and sale of the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection.

The Coppertone sunscreen class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of consumers who purchased a Product in the Coppertone SPF 55-100+ collection, within the applicable statute of limitations, in the United States for personal use.

It follows a 2012 class action lawsuit settlement over claims that Merck exaggerated the benefits of its Coppertone sunscreen products by using the terms “sunblock,” “waterproof,” “all day” and “all day protection.” Merck denied the allegations but agreed to pay between $3 million and $10 million to resolve the litigation. Class Members of the Coppertone sunscreen class action settlement received a cash refund for their purchases.

The Plaintiff is seeking class certification, damages, restitution, disgorgement of Merck’s revenues, and injunctive relief that orders Merck to engage in corrective advertising campaign.

The Coppertone Sunscreen SPF Class Action Lawsuit is Danika Gisvold v. Merck & Co. Inc., et al., Case No. 14-cv-01371, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.