Settlement Spotlight
Active Investigations
-
California Early Termination Fee (ETF) Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Depakote Birth Defect Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Dilantin Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Drywall Price-Fixing, Antitrust Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Kidney Dialysis Heart Attack, GranuFlo & NaturaLyte Recall Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Mesothelioma Asbestos Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Metal on Metal Replacement Hip Implant Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Mirena IUD Injury Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Propecia Loss of Sex Drive, Sexual Dysfunction Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Stevens Johnson (SJS) & Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Text Message Spam, Cell Phone Call TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Type 2 Diabetes Drugs Januvia, Byetta Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Unum/UnumProvident Disability Insurance Claim Denial Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Vaginal Mesh Sling Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Wage & Hour, Unpaid Overtime Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
-
Yaz/Yasmin, Ocella & Beyaz Birth Control Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Zithromax Z-Pak Azithromycin Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation
-
Zoloft & SSRI Antidepressant Birth Defect Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
Top Settlements
Top News
Top Drug Lawsuits
Class Action Lawsuit and Settlement News
| Aveeno Active Naturals Sunscreen Class Action Lawsuit |
|
|
- Thursday, 13 September 2012 14:20
Aveeno Active Naturals Sunscreen Class Action Lawsuit
By Mike Holter
Plaintiff Guillermina Contreras alleges in the Aveeno Active Naturals sunscreen class action lawsuit that Johnson & Johnson falsely advertises that its sunscreen products with SPF values ranging from 70 to 100+ provide more sun protection than Aveeno SPF 55.
According to the FDA, however, sunscreen products labeled with SPF values more than 50 provide no additional clinical benefit over SPF 50 products and are misleading to the consumer, the class action lawsuit says.
Contreras also alleges that Johnson & Johnson misrepresents its Aveeno Active Naturals sunscreens as “sunblock” products that are “waterproof” and provide “long-lasting protection” against the sun. According to the class action lawsuit, scientific studies have allegedly established that sunscreen products are not “waterproof,” do not “block” all UV radiation, and must be reapplied every two hours to maintain their effectiveness. Based on these studies, the FDA has identified the terms “sunblock” and “waterproof” as false and misleading terms, the Aveeno sunscreen class action lawsuit says.
Johnson & Johnson is able to charge a premium price for its high SPF sunscreen products, even though they are no more effective than its Aveeno SPF 50 sunscreen products, which are cheaper.
Contreras is seeking to represent all similar consumers who were duped into paying more for Aveeno Active Naturals 70-100+ SPF sunscreen.
The Aveeno Active Naturals Sunscreen False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit case is Guillermina Contreras v. Johnson and Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-7099, California Central District Court.
Updated September 13th, 2012
All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 - 2012 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
Last Updated on Thursday, 27 December 2012 11:09




Comments
RSS feed for comments to this post