Sales of products with “pure” ingredients, and containing a high proportion of such ingredients are growing much faster than sales of products that cannot make these claims. The complaint for this class action alleges that a Procter & Gamble product, Gillette Pure shave cream with aloe, is deceptively advertised and does not meet consumers’ understanding of a “pure” product.
Two classes have been proposed for this action:
- The Illinois Class is all persons in Illinois who bought the product during the applicable statutes of limitations.
- The Consumer Fraud Multi-State Class is all persons in Wyoming, Kansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Iowa, Utah, and Alaska who bought the product during the applicable statutes of limitations.
Page 1 of the complaint shows an image of the product, which comes in a white tube. Among the representations on the front label are the product name “Pure,” “Free From Alcohol, Dyes, Parabens, Sulfates,” “0%” and that it is made “With Aloe.”
The complaint reviews dictionary definitions of the word “pure,” then alleges, “In the context of a fabricated product like cosmetics, ‘pure’ is understood to mean a final product consisting of ingredients which are ‘not [significantly] altered from [their] original or natural sate” and are ‘not harmful in any way.’”
Consumers value cosmetic products that are labeled as being “pure,” the complaint alleges, because they believe that products that are not pure are harmful to health and to the environment.
But the complaint alleges that the Gillette product is not “pure.” Pages 2 and 3 of the complaint reproduce the ingredient list. The complaint alleges that “no less than ten of the fourteen ingredients are not pure, because they are significantly altered from their original or natural state.”
For example, the complaint points to the second and third ingredients (after water), palmitic acid and stearic acid, and claims that they are not pure, because even though they are based on palm oil, that substance “is significantly altered through saponification.” The complaint describes saponification as “a chemical reaction involving the conversion of fats, oils, and lipids by heat in the presence of aqueous alkali such as sodium hydroxide.”
Another ingredient, glycerin, can be pure if it is sourced from vegetable oils, but the complaint alleges that the glycerin in the product “is manufactured through hydrogenolysis[,]” which is “a chemical reaction whereby a carbon-carbon or carbon-heteroatom single bond is cleaved or undergoes lysis by hydrogen.”
The complaint makes similar claims about coconut acid, potassium hydroxide, triethanolamine, phenoxyethanol, sodium hydroxide, cellulose, and the fragrance ingredient in the product. While it admits that the last three ingredients may be “pure,” it also points out that these are the least predominant ingredients in the product.
The complaint alleges that the product is sold at a premium price because it is misrepresented as “pure.”
Article Type: LawsuitTopic: Consumer
Most Recent Case Event
Gillette “Pure” Shave Cream with Aloe Complaint
August 19, 2022
Sales of products with “pure” ingredients, and containing a high proportion of such ingredients are growing much faster than sales of products that cannot make these claims. The complaint for this class action alleges that a Procter & Gamble product, Gillette Pure shave cream with aloe, is deceptively advertised and does not meet consumers’ understanding of a “pure” product.
Gillette “Pure” Shave Cream with Aloe ComplaintCase Event History
Gillette “Pure” Shave Cream with Aloe Complaint
August 19, 2022
Sales of products with “pure” ingredients, and containing a high proportion of such ingredients are growing much faster than sales of products that cannot make these claims. The complaint for this class action alleges that a Procter & Gamble product, Gillette Pure shave cream with aloe, is deceptively advertised and does not meet consumers’ understanding of a “pure” product.
Gillette “Pure” Shave Cream with Aloe Complaint