This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Unfair Competition
Consumer Legal Remedies Act

Gabe Watkins v. Vital Pharmaceuticals Inc., General Nutrition Centers Inc.

Published: Nov. 23, 2013 | Result Date: Nov. 7, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:12-cv-09374-SJO-JC Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Casey E. Sadler
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)

Marc L. Godino
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)

Lionel Z. Glancy
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)


Defendant

Alan J. Droste

David J. Vendler
(Law Offices of David J. Vendler)


Facts

Vital Pharmaceuticals Inc. produced and distributed nutritional supplements and performance beverages. One of its products was a high protein meal replacement bar, part of its "Zero Impact" line of sports nutrition products. General Nutritional Centers Inc. (GNC) was a retailer who sold these bars.

Gabe Watkins filed suit against Vital and GNC, claiming that these bars were advertised falsely.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Watkins argued that although Vital marketed the bars as "zero impact," the bars had an impact on consumers' carbohydrate, sugar, and overall caloric intake. As a result, the marketing was misleading. The nutritional information contained on the bars was also placed in a way that made it difficult to see and read. He asserted that the bars violated the Unfair Competition Law and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants moved to dismiss the case, arguing that court should defer the matter to the Food and Drug Administration based on its primary jurisdiction.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. The court also dismissed without prejudice plaintiff's amended class action complaint.


#111817

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390