LOS ANGELES (Legal Newsline) – A troubled proposed class action has come to an end in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Plaintiffs lawyers and Euro Pharma recently told the court they reached a settlement that will cover plaintiff Michael Dotson but not the users of Terry Naturally pain reliever he had sought to represent. Financial terms weren’t included in the Nov. 12 filing.
Terry Naturally’s curcumin supplements reduce inflammation in the body but do not reduce muscle soreness associated with exercise, lawyers at The Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman alleged in a class action complaint last year.
They said the company should have disclosed that curcumin has not been proven to relieve muscle soreness, but a federal judge in Los Angeles was skeptical of their claims. He tossed their second amended complaint in May but allowed them to file another one.
On July 22, Judge Andre Birotte tossed that third amended complaint, with prejudice. That didn’t stop Friedman from appealing the decision to the Ninth Circuit on Aug. 10.
“Again, the (third amended complaint) alleges that the product stated that it would provide pain relief for ‘occasional muscle pain due to exercise or overuse,’” Birotte wrote.
“Plaintiff tested this theory by taking three capsules daily for one week (as recommended by Defendant’s packaging) while exercising for one-half hour, five times that week. After exercising, Plaintiff experienced muscle soreness and pain, and thus concluded that the product did not remove, alleviate get rid of, reduce or otherwise affect Plaintiff’s exercise induced muscle soreness and pain.
“After this one-week trial, Plaintiff stopped using the product. Once again, Plaintiff fails to allege why these parameters are sufficient to prove falsity.”
Studies on curcumin cited in the complaints baffled Birotte, who wrote they fail to show why pain relief was impossible to achieve.
“The studies cited by Plaintiff show that taking curcumin ‘may result in enhanced recovery by reducing inflammation and preventing muscle damage associated with exercise over long periods of time spanning from weeks to months,’” the decision says.
“Plaintiff appears to take issue with the ‘preventative wording and how this suggests future pain relief as opposed to immediate, but again, the products make no claim of immediate pain relief after one week of exercising.”