Rossi v. The Proctor & Gamble Company

Case # 11-cv-07238
Case Name Rossi v. The Proctor & Gamble Company
Jurisdiction US District Court for NJ
Summary

Proctor & Gamble retails toothpaste under the Crest brand. They retailed a specific product line, "Crest Sensitivity", which was marketed as providing relief from sensitive teeth. It was sold at a 75% premium over non-specialized toothpastes. However, both Crest Sensitivity and Crest Pro-Health (the standard Crest toothpaste "have the same active ingredient, in the same amount, the same indicated uses, the same warnings, same directions, same inactive ingredients, and same flavor" (See Complaint, paragraph 5). Indeed, the only difference between the two products was the color, the claims, and the price. These misleading marketing claims caused consumers to pay more for a premium product that was identical to a cheaper item.

Final Approval Date 10/03/2013
Result
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. Objection was found to be without merit and overruled.
  3. Objector Blanchard appealed the Final Approval.
  4. Class counsel moved for an appeal bond of $30,000, which was denied by the Court.
  5. Class counsel also moved for sanctions, owing to the fact that Christopher Bandas assisted Objector Blanchard without disclosing their relationship.
  6. Motion for sanctions was dropped in conjunction with the voluntary dismissal of the appeal.
  7. Appeal was voluntarily dismissed.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 03/21/2014
Attachments Docket Report.pdf
Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval.pdf
Final Opinion.pdf
Final Approval.pdf
Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Response to Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Reply to Response to Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Opinion Regarding Appeal Bond.pdf
Motion for Sanctions.pdf
Response to Motion for Sanctions.pdf
Withdrawal of Motion for Sanctions.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Tim Blanchard

Objectors Tim Blanchard
Signers Tim Blanchard
Attorneys Christopher A. Bandas
Summary
  1. Attorneys' fees are excessive and abstrusely calculated.
  2. Class counsel has not produced adequate information to assess the fee request.

NOTE: Christopher Bandas filed his appearance on the appeal

Attachments Objection of Tim Blanchard.pdf
Plaintiff's Response to Blanchard Objection.pdf
Appeal of Objector Blanchard.pdf
Bandas Appearance for Objector-Appellant Blanchard.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Objector Blanchard.pdf
Blanchard Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated