Summary of Action
In May 2016, the parties to one of the class actions reached a proposed settlement agreement that contains a number of deficiencies, including that it (1) fails to require CVS to effectively change the marketing at issue in the complaint; (2) condones continuing violations of a 2014 Federal Trade Commission Order; and (3) provides insufficient monetary relief to class members.
As a result of these issues, TINA.org filed a letter in June 2016 as amici curiae opposing the proposed settlement and urging the Court to deny preliminary approval. The parties then filed an amended settlement agreement later that month, which TINA.org opposed as well.
In May 2018, the U.S. Magistrate Judge presiding over the case recommended denying preliminary approval of the settlement agreement reached between the parties because he concluded that the named plaintiff in the case failed to demonstrate that he would fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. (Of note, the named plaintiff — Mr. Aliano — was found to have an “unusually close and long-standing relationship” with the lawyer that filed this case, having filed at least 36 other lawsuits with the same lawyer.) In June 2018, the case was dismissed without prejudice.
(TINA.org also alerted the FTC to the violations of the 2014 FTC Order. For more information on that action, click here.)