At its core, the case is about statements GOLO made in connection with its Release dietary supplement and its health benefits, in particular its ability to address insulin resistance and promote weight loss.
Vincenzza Bubak, the lead plaintiff for the case, bought GOLO dietary supplements in December 2020. Bubak alleges the pills did not work as advertised and that she had to handle shipping and handling costs when she requested a refund from the company.
What does the lawsuit allege?
The thrust of the lawsuit is that GOLO’s “prominent and systematic mislabeling of the Product and its false and deceptive advertising form a pattern of unlawful and unfair business practices that harms the public and, if unstopped, could lead to substantial societal harm.”
The lawsuit makes allegations related to three key categories:
- Improper implied disease claims
- Inadequate directions for use
- Inappropriate use of "clinically-proven" language
The lawsuit alleges that GOLO made statements related to Insulin Resistance and its product that, taken as a whole, amount to “implied disease claims” that are improper given the product’s branding.
And as noted, the lawsuit takes issue with other company claims and GOLO’s use of statements that its supplements are “clinically-proven.” The plaintiffs allege the basis for those claims were not peer-reviewed studies and, according to the Complaint, “[i]n order for a claim to be considered scientifically and clinically proven, as [GOLO] claim[s], the claim must be widely accepted in its applicable field and have overwhelming evidence supporting it. Moreover, there must be a consensus in the scientific community agreeing with the representations.”
What laws are at issue in the GOLO lawsuit?
The lawsuit alleges violations of:
- California’s Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200)
- California’s False Advertising Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500)
- California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1750)
The class action lawsuit also alleges Breach of Express Warranty and Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability.
