A group of consumers has filed a putative class action against Cytosport Inc., maker of Muscle Milk, alleging that its powdered and ready-to-drink protein supplements do not contain the ingredients and characteristics advertised on its packaging. Clay v. Cytosport Inc., 15-165 (S.D. Cal., filed January 23, 2015). The plaintiffs argue that independent scientific testing shows that Muscle Milk products contain substantially less protein than the amount represented in the Nutrition Facts panel. They also allege that Muscle Milk labels list L-glutamine amino acids separately from the protein content to falsely imply that the products have additional L-glutamine beyond the content inherent in the protein mix. The complaint further argues that Muscle Milk labels cannot feature the word “lean” because the product does not contain less fat than its competitors. Alleging deceptive advertising, misrepresentation and breach of warranties, the putative class seeks certification, damages, an injunction, and attorney’s fees.


Issue 553

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>