Pantene Manufacturer Proctor & Gamble Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged False Advertisement Of Nature Fusion Shampoo & Conditioner
Consumers have not proved to the court that Proctor & Gamble Co. misled them into believing Pantene Pro-V “Nature Fusion” shampoo was natural. However, a California federal judge has granted them a further 21 days to submit an amended class action complaint.
Sean McGinity v. The Proctor & Gamble Company
On Tuesday, United States District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers approved a motion to drop the Pantene Pro-V lawsuit against Proctor & Gamble that was brought in 2020.
Lead plaintiff Sean McGinity made claims that he paid a premium price for Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion — shampoo and conditioner — products in June 2019 based on assertions that the products were derived from “nature.”
He claimed that the hair products were falsely advertised and were not worth the additional price because they contained non-natural and synthetic components, harsh and potentially toxic ingredients, and were otherwise fundamentally unnatural.
According to the lawsuit, Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion products contain many synthetic components, including synthetic fragrances, colors, surfactants, and preservatives, among other things.
Difference Between “Nature” and “Natural”
According to reports, several of the ingredients, notably the synthetic dyes, are derived from non-natural sources such as petroleum or coal tar. McGinity stated that the Pantene personal care products could not and should not be promoted as natural as a result of the presence of these substances.
McGinity had failed to identify sufficient facts to suggest that the shampoo and conditioner labels would deceive a reasonable customer, according to Judge Rogers’ ruling on Tuesday.
In addition, according to Rogers, the court decides that the plaintiff has not adequately alleged that P&G’s use of the label “Nature Fusion” on its packaging is misleading or deceptive.
McGinity was given 21 days to revise her complaint.
Judge Rogers further stated that the court was not convinced that the word “nature” was synonymous with the word “natural,” and as a result, the court did not rely on case law relating to the use of the term “natural” on the packaging.
According to Judge Rogers, the plaintiff has not established, and the court does not believe he could have alleged, that shampoos and conditioners occur naturally and are thus a result of natural conditions.
Frequently, shampoos are the subject of class action lawsuits. A class action lawsuit was filed against the maker of Selsun Blue in December of last year, alleging that the company’s claimed natural anti-dandruff shampoo includes a number of synthetic substances. The Emily Lewsis Selsun Blue Settlement was reached in 2021 to end the class action lawsuit.
Editor’s Note on Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion Class Action Lawsuit:
This article is written to inform you of the class action lawsuit against The Proctor & Gamble Company’s Pantene over the alleged false advertisement.
Case Name & No.: Sean McGinity v. The Proctor & Gamble Company, Case No. 4:20-cv-08164-KAW
Jurisdiction: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Products/Services: Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion products
Allegations: Proctor & Gamble allegedly falsely advertised its Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion as natural products
What do you think of the plaintiff’s allegations against the defendant? Click the “Contact Us” button below and share with us your thoughts!