Law
Laws

Trident Seafoods and Costco Face Fish Oil Class Action Lawsuit

Trident Seafood and Costco are facing a fish oil class action lawsuit. The plaintiff claims the two companies deceived consumers by misleading them about the benefits of their fish oil products. The plaintiff is seeking damages and an injunction to stop marketing the product in the future, as well as attorneys’ fees. The plaintiff is represented by Michael Gabrielli. To learn more, read the rest of this article. This article provides an overview of the case.

Costco Kirkland Signature Wild Alaskan Fish Oil class action lawsuit

A New York man is suing Costco over a product he claims contains only half the amount of omega fatty acids advertised on its label. The plaintiffs in the Costco Kirkland Signature Wild Alaskan Fish Oil class action lawsuit claimed the company violated federal and state consumer protection laws by selling the nutrient-deficient supplement. The lawsuit seeks class-action status on behalf of all Costco customers and the consumer groups that represent them.

According to the suit, fish oil contains a high concentration of omega-fatty acids, which help reduce blood pressure. But unlike pharmaceuticals, nutritional supplements are not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, which is why the Costco Kirkland Signature Wild Alaskan Fish Oil class action lawsuit is so controversial. This case will likely result in more lawsuits against Costco because of its unsavory practices.

Trident Seafood class action lawsuit

A U.S. federal judge recently dismissed a class action lawsuit against Trident Seafoods and Costco over their marketing of fish oil. The lawsuit claimed that the Kirkland Signature brand of Wild Alaskan Fish Oil contains false omega fatty acids. While the judge did not give a reason for dismissing the lawsuit, the company argued that the lawsuit only served to stimulate sales. Costco declined to comment on the suit.

A New York man has filed a class action lawsuit against Costco and Trident Seafood for deceptive marketing practices related to their Kirkland Signature Wild Alaskan Fish Oil supplement. The plaintiffs claim that the supplement contains fewer than half of the omega-fatty acids advertised. The plaintiffs say that they were misled and paid more than they would have if they had known the truth about what was in the product.

New York False Advertising Act violation

The plaintiffs in the Costco Fish Oil lawsuit claim that the supplement is a fraud and that it contains fewer omega fatty acids than it claims. They want to represent a nationwide class of consumers, as well as California and New York subclasses and seek damages and a court order prohibiting the company from using deceptive labeling on its supplements. Their lawsuit also alleges that the manufacturer of the fish oil supplement stripped its product of its health benefits through a manufacturing process.

Despite the plaintiff’s claims, the court has ruled that Costco lacked standing to seek injunctive relief and failed to provide timely notice of the CLRA claim. The Court granted Costco’s motion to dismiss and granted Puri limited leave to amend her complaint. Puri must file a second amended complaint no later than January 3, 2022. In the meantime, Puri must seek redress in the lower court and appeal the ruling.

Costco violations of New York General Business Law

A lawsuit claiming that Costco has violated New York General Business Law is being filed against the retail giant by a worker who claims to have been mistreated by the company. According to the complaint, Costco failed to properly pay its workers, who are classified as manual workers under the New York General Business Law. This includes workers who spend at least 25% of their time doing manual or physical tasks such as walking the aisles of Costco or lifting heavy items.

The class action suit alleges that Costco violated the New York General Business Law when it backdated new 12-month memberships to the expiration date of the previous membership. However, the class action motion was denied because Costco did not admit the plaintiff’s claims. In the meantime, the plaintiff’s attorney, Meiselman Denlea Packman Carton Eberz P.C., filed a motion to dismiss the cause of action.

You May Also Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.