Barrera v. Pharmavite

Case # 11-cv-04153
Case Name Barrera v. Pharmavite
Jurisdiction US District Court for C.D. CA
Summary

Defendant manufactures, markets, sells and distributes the Nature Made® TripleFlex line of joint health dietary supplements.  Marketing materials and packaging for the product claim that it helps reduce joint pain and increases joint mobility and flexibility.  However, plaintiffs allege that there is no clinical evidence that the active ingredients in the product provide the stated benefits.  As a result of this misleading marketing and packaging, consumers purchased a product that did not provide the expected benefits.

Final Approval Date 12/04/2017
Result
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. The objections of Justin Ference were overruled.
  3. Objector Ference appealed the Final Approval.
  4. Class counsel motioned for an appeal bond of $80,842, arguing that Objector Ference and Attorney Tucker are "serial objectors."
  5. The Court found that an appeal bond was necessary and GRANTED one for $7,500 ($2,500 in appellate costs and $5,000 in increased administration costs).
  6. Objector-Appellant Ference posted the appeal bond.
  7. Objector-Appellant Ference voluntarily withdrew his appeal three weeks later.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 03/30/2018
Attachments Docket Report.pdf
Second Amended Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval Order.pdf
Fairness Hearing Transcript.pdf
Final Judgment and Order.pdf
Memorandum in Support of Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Ference Opposition to Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Response in Support of Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Order Granting Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Notice of Posting of Appeal Bond by Objector Ference.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Justin Ference

Objectors Justin Ference
Signers Justin Ference
Caroline Tucker
Attorneys Caroline Tucker
Summary
  1. Small monetary compensation for the class is due to inadequate representation.
  2. Injunctive relief is illusory and ineffectual.
  3. Recovery by individual class members is arbitrarily capped.
  4. Cy pres provisions are improper.
  5. Cy pres recipients are insufficiently linked to the settlement terms.
  6. Attorneys' fees are excessive and should be linked to the actual recovery by the class.
  7. Attorneys' fee request is not posted on the settlement website for class members to review.
Attachments Objection of Justin Ference.pdf
Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Final Approval and Response to Objection.pdf
Appeal of Objector Ference.pdf
Dismissal of Ference Appeal.pdf
Ference Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated