Yamagata

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GORDON NOBORU YAMAGATA, et al., Case No. 17-cv-03529-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

RECKITT BENCKISER LLC, Re: Dkt. No. 116 Defendant.

This case is about joint supplements—and, more precisely, the advertising statements printed on their boxes. The plaintiffs have sued the maker of the supplements under state law, contending that the statements on the boxes are misleading. The primary question presented by this summary judgment motion is whether the state law claims are preempted by federal law. If the boxes are best understood as making assertions about the ability of the supplements to alleviate the symptoms of arthritis, those assertions violate federal law, and the state law claims attacking them are not preempted. If the boxes are best understood as not making assertions relating to arthritis, those assertions are authorized by federal law, and the state law claims are preempted. This ruling explains why the boxes are best understood as making assertions regarding arthritis, and seeks in the process to explain why this determination is the…