Lang Pharma Nutrition’s CoQ-10 Softgels
The complaint – which was originally filed in August 2017 and amended in November 2017 – alleges that the companies misleadingly advertise CoQ-10 dietary supplements as supporting heart health and having “better absorption” when, according to the plaintiffs, the supplements cannot provide the advertised benefits due to substandard dissolution and delayed ruptures. Plaintiffs also claim that the supplements supplied by Lang are misleadingly compared to Qunol products because they are formulated differently and lab testing shows that they are not comparable.
The settlement agreement allows class members who file a Claim Form to choose between a $3.50 cash payment or a $12.50 product credit (claimants with proof of purchase may receive one credit while those with proof of purchase may receive up to five credits per household). The company also agreed to revise product labels in order to better explain the “better absorption” representations. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for November 29, 2018. For more information, go to https://q10settlement.com/.
To learn more about the earlier class actions whose allegations were combined in this case, click on the case information below.
- Cortina v. Walmart, Case No. 13-cv-2054, S. D. CA.
- Harris v. CVS, Case No. 13-cv-2329, C. D. CA.
- Reynolds v. Walgreen, Case No. 15-cv-324, N. D. CA.
- Alvandi v. CVS, Case No. 15-cv-1503, C. D. CA.
The parties also agreed to take steps to stay or dismiss subsequent filed actions, including Villasenor v. Walmart, Case No. 17-cv-6439, C. D. CA.
For more of TINA.org’s coverage of CoQ-10 supplements, click here.