Facts

David Johns and Marc Bordman filed a class action against Bayer Corp. and Bayer Healthcare LLC in connection with the One A Day Men's 50+ Advantage and One A Day Men's Health Formula, products manufactured, distributed, and sold by Bayer.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that Bayer had a long history of misrepresenting on product packaging, commercial advertisements, website, and other marketing materials that selenium, a key ingredient in the above-mentioned products, had the ability to reduce the risk of prostate cancer. However, there was no evidence supporting Bayer's claims. In fact, recent studies showed that selenium does not prevent or reduce the risk of prostate cancer in men. Rather, it may actually cause diabetes. As a result, plaintiffs lost money for buying the deceptive products. Plaintiffs sued Bayer for violating the Unfair Competition Law and relief under the California Legal Remedies Act. Plaintiffs also asserted a claim for unjust enrichment.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Bayer filed a motion for summary judgment, on the ground that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to plaintiffs' claims. Bayer contended that plaintiffs' claim regarding Bayer's statement: "Selenium may reduce the risk of certain forms of cancer" were preempted by federal law. Plaintiffs other claims regarding Bayer's statements likewise fail because they lack substantiation and cannot prove that those statements were false. Bayer also contended that recovery in this case under the CLRA and the UCL was limited to the difference between the price paid for the disputed products.

Damages

Plaintiffs sought a refund of the purchase price and disgorgement of Bayer's profits.

Result

The court granted Bayer's motion for summary judgment on the lack of substantiation theory.