Inner Armour Whey Dietary Supplements

July 2016: This case was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice.

June 2016: The parties to this lawsuit reached a settlement agreement and notified the court that they will file a dismissal within 30 days. The terms of the agreement have not been disclosed.

November 2014: A class-action lawsuit was filed against I A Nutrition, Inc. for allegedly misrepresenting the amount of whey protein contained in Inner Armour dietary supplements, including Mass Peak Whey Hydrolysate Enhanced and Nitro Peak Whey Hydrolysate Enhanced. According to the complaint, the company uses a practice called “protein spiking” (i.e., adding cheaper non-protein ingredients, such as amino acids, to increase the nitrogen content, which then makes it appear as if the product has more protein than it actually has). As a result, the product labels misleadingly represent that the supplements contain more than twice the amount of protein they actually have.

The plaintiffs also claim that the product labels do not list alanine and tryptophan as ingredients when, in fact, the supplements contain both, and instead list L-Leucine, L-Valine, and L-Isoleucin (“BCAA’s) as ingredients when the supplements actually do not contain any of these free form amino acids.
(Mee et al v. I A Nutrition, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-5006, N. D. CA.).

For more information about class-action lawsuits regarding the use of “protein-spiking” and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.

Tags: ,



Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker



  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect TINA.org’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases