Saturday, May 16, 2009

"Sun-Screen Battle Royale!" -- Schering-Plough's Coppertone® v. Neutrogena's UltraSheer®


Though I didn't mention it at the time, a few weeks ago, Schering-Plough's lawyers filed a federal suit in Delaware -- against Neutrogena, claiming that some of the sunscreens marketed by Neutrogena made "literally false" comparative claims about some of the Coppertone® products sold by Schering-Plough, constituting arguable violations of the federal Lanham Act (which Act prohibits false advertisements through channels of interstate commerce -- like print and TV ads).

Last night, Neutrogena formally answered those Coppertone charges -- and made a few of their own. Which is perfect -- because the "2009 sunscreen season" is just getting underway for most of the nation, right? Right.

In technical terms, Neutrogena filed counterclaims against Schering-Plough's Coppertone earlier Lanham Act claims. In the street-vernacular, though -- Neutrogena just cracked open a very tall can of "shut-up juice". Let's listen in:

. . . .97. These counterclaims are for false advertising under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and the state statutory and common law of unfair competition. Specifically, Schering has caused to be published and disseminated false and misleading advertisements that claim that only Coppertone NutraShield with Dual Defense provides both UVA/UVB protection and antioxidants that promote skin repair, when in fact Neutrogena and other sunscreen manufacturers market and sell such products. . . .

102. Schering and Neutrogena both market and sell sun protection products.

103. Schering markets and sells a sunscreen lotion called Coppertone NutraShield.

104. Beginning on or about March 2009, Schering began airing a television advertisement claiming that “Only NutraShield has Dual Defense. One, I get powerful sun protection and two, antioxidants that promote natural skin repair.” (Exh. A, attached).

105. On or about April 1, 2009, Schering ran a print advertisement claiming that “Only new Coppertone NutraShield has Dual Defense. . . . Dual Defense gives you: (1) Advanced UVA/UVB sun protection / (2) Nourishing antioxidants that help neutralize free radicals to help skin repair itself.” (Exh. B, attached).

106. Coppertone NutraShield® products are not the only products that provide both UVA/UVB sun protection and antioxidants that promote skin repair.

107. Sunscreen manufacturers other than Schering market and sell sun protection products that provide both UVA/UVB protection and antioxidants that promote skin repair.

108. For example, Neutrogena markets and sells Neutrogena UltraSheer® SPF 45, which provides both significant UVA/UVB protection and antioxidants that promote skin repair. Other sunscreen manufacturers likewise market sunscreens with similar characteristics.

109. The foregoing acts have occurred in or in a manner affecting interstate commerce. . . .

111. Schering’s advertising for its Coppertone NutraShield sunscreen lotion is false and misleading, and violates Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

112. Unless Schering is enjoined from continuing to make these false and misleading claims, Neutrogena will suffer irreparable harm, including a loss of goodwill, sales and profits, and erosion of its market share. . . .

I guess one should "be careful what one wishes for".

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

My comment's not relevant to this post, but you don't seem to monitor prior postings on your blog. There's been no response to my comment on your old pension posting.

I posted on 5/2 and then again in your "chat about ...whatever" space a week later as follows.

left comment 5/2: RSVP pl: left a comment on your pension post on 5/2. https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4241416962008169508&postID=7907591555008628182&page=1

Condor said...

So sorry -- you are right -- I did miss both.

And though I do try, I don't always see everything (I don't have the comments emailed to me, either). Ah well -- thanks for bringing this one back up.

Take a look at the relevant comment box, now -- I will keep watching for the June 2009 SEC Form 11-K, to confirm my suspicions (and yours).

Namaste