Defendant claims Joint Juice provides significant health benefits for the joints of all consumers who drink its products. These claimed health benefits are the only reason a consumer would purchase Joint Juice. Defendant’s advertising claims, however, are false, misleading, and reasonably likely to deceive the public.
As alleged, Defendant markets, sells, and distributes Joint Juice, a line of joint health dietary supplements.’ Through an extensive, integrated, and widespread nationwide marketing campaign, Defendant promises that Joint Juice will support and nourish cartilage, lubricate joints, and improve joint comfort. Defendant asserts that the ingredient glucosamine hydrochloride will provide these significant health benefits.
Throughout its advertising and marketing, Defendant communicated the same substantive message on all of the Products’ packaging and labeling: that the Products will improve the health ofjoints and relieve joint pain. As a result, the joint health benefit message on the packaging of Defendant’s Products will be collectively referred to as Defendant’s “joint health benefit representations.”
Defendant’s advertising and marketing campaign is designed to induce consumers to purchase Joint Juice because of their reliance upon the accuracy of the deceptive health benefits message. As a result of its extensive marketing campaign (in 2009, Defendant spent a reported $3.5 million advertising Joint Juice), and in just the past six years, Defendant has sold over $100 million dollars of the Joint Juice products.
Defendant, however, has sold products that do not perform as advertised. As a result of the misleading messages conveyed by its marketing campaign, Defendant has caused consumers to purchase products that do not perform as advertised.