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
Consumers Legal Remedies Act
Unfair Competition

Leonidas Jovel v. Boiron Inc., Boiron USA Inc., Laboratories Boiron

Published: Dec. 27, 2014 | Result Date: Nov. 5, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:11-cv-10803-SVW-SH Bench Decision –  Partial Certification

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Elaine A. Ryan
(Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint PC)

Jeff S. Westerman
(Westerman Law Corp.)

Patricia N. Syverson
(Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint PC)

Jordanna G. Thigpen
(Thigpen Legal PC)

Stewart M. Weltman
(Siprut PC)

Keith J. Verrier

Howard J. Sedran

Lindsey M. Gomez-Gray

Manfred P. Muecke
(Manfred APC)


Defendant

Valerie M. Goo
(Crowell & Moring LLP)

Haven G. Ward

Christina G. Sarchio
(Dechert LLP)


Facts

Leonidas Jovel filed a class action against Boiron Inc., Boiron USA Inc., and Laboratories Boiron, concerning defendants' homeopathic flu remedies, Oscillococcinum and Children's Oscillo. Christopher Lewert later took the place of Jovel as lead plaintiff in this action.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that defendants mislabeled the Oscillo products by advertising that the products could cure flu-like symptoms when it could not. Plaintiff alleged that the product actually contained water and ultra-diluted amounts of incubated duck hearts and livers placed on sugar pellets. Plaintiffs alleged that the "sugar pills" contained a very tiny dose, if any, of allegedly natural substances that rendered the product ineffective in treating any flu-like symptoms.

Plaintiff alleged that the product was false and misleading, and asserted claims for violations of California's Unfair Competition Law and California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act. Plaintiff then moved to certify the class.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied plaintiff's allegations, and asserted various affirmative defenses.

Result

The court granted Lewert's class certification motion in part. Specifically, the court certified a class of California residents who purchased the product between July 27, 2012 and Aug. 31, 2013, as to both the UCL and CLRA claims. However, the court denied Lewert's motion for class certification in all other respects. On Dec. 1, 2014, the court issued a Clarification Order that indicated that the court's order intended to limit the class period to before defendant Boiron began using the Gallucci disclaimers on the Oscillo products. In September 2013, Boiron began shipping 30-dose Oscillo packages with new disclaimers. The court wanted to limit the class period to make sure that all class members had bought Oscillo packages without the Gallucci disclaimers.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Dec. 29, 2011.


#90959

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

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