Pirl

Gerber Good Start Consumer Fraud Lawsuit

samantha severyn

 

In the suit, Zakaria alleges that Gerber claimed (a) Good Start Gentle was the first and only formula whose consumption reduced the risk of infants developing allergies; (b) that consumption of Good Start Gentle reduced the risk of developing infant atopic dermatitis, an inflammatory skin disorder; (c) that Good Start Gentle was the first and only formula endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reduce the risk of developing allergies; and (d) using the FDA term of art Qualified Health Claim to convey that Good Start Gentle received FDA approval for the health claims advertised and was fit for a particular purpose when, in actuality, the term Qualified Health Claim means that the FDA did not grant approval for the use of a non-qualified health claim and that the scientific support for the claim is limited or lacking (at best).

“After reviewing the petition, the scientific evidence submitted with the petition, and other pertinent scientific evidence and information, FDA concluded that there is no credible evidence to support a qualified health claim relating the consumption of 100 percent whey protein partially hydrolyzed to a reduced risk of food allergy in infants,” the FDA wrote. “We are aware of no such credible evidence that has been developed since the time the petition was denied…”

Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated consumers, brings this consumer protection action against Defendant based on its course of unlawful conduct. Plaintiff alleges violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, California False Advertising Law, the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, as well as Breach of Express Warranty, Breach of the Implied Warranty of Merchantability, and other claims.