Sidley Secures Dismissal for Golo in False Advertising Class Action

Sidley achieved a significant victory on behalf of Golo, LLC (Golo) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. On January 8, 2024, Judge Dale A. Drozd dismissed class action claims related to violations of three California laws – Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Golo is a dietary supplement company that allegedly made misrepresentations about a product, which gave rise to the plaintiff’s claims. Among other things, the plaintiff alleged that Golo made implied disease claims without prior FDA approval. After the court ruled that the plaintiff’s implied disease claims were not preempted, reasoning that California’s Sherman Law provides for state enforcement of claims that parallel federal law, Sidley was retained to file a motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, for certification to appeal. Sidley persuasively argued that new Ninth Circuit precedent on preemption, Nexus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Central Admixture Pharmacy Services, Inc., 48 F. 4th 1040 (9th Cir. 2022), should govern even though that case involved a different class of products. The court agreed and granted the motion for reconsideration on preemption grounds, dismissed the case, and entered judgment in favor of Golo.

The case is significant because it was the first application of the new Ninth Circuit precedent on preemption to a dietary supplement.

The Sidley team was led by partner Amy Lally (Century City), co-leader of the firm’s Consumer Class Actions practice, alongside partner Tacy Flint (Chicago). The team also included senior managing associate Rachel Hampton (Chicago) and managing associate Kris Martinez (Los Angeles).