Rosenwald

Rosenwald v. Kimberly Clark Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 14, 20233:22-cv-04993California5,296 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA San Francisco Division JUDAH ROSENWALD, CRAIG Case No. 3:22-cv-04993-LB

CHOURAKI-LEWIN, CINDY RUTTER,

WILLIAM RUTTER, TRINITY ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED

GUEVREMONT, NATASHA COMPLAINT

GARAMANI, JAMES SMITH, PATRICIA PEREZ, JEANINE ECKERT, and Re: ECF No. 25 PRESTON LESCHINS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, 15 Plaintiffs, 16 v.

KIMBERLY CLARK CORPORATION,

18 Defendant. 19 INTRODUCTION In this putative class action, the plaintiffs, who are from different states (California, Wyoming, Washington, Colorado, Florida, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey) claim that the defendant’s marketing of Kleenex Wet Wipes Germ Removal falsely suggests that the product is a germicide, in violation of their states’ consumer-protection laws. The front label claims that the product “wipes away 99% of germs from skin” and has “no harsh chemicals.” The back label lists the product’s ingredients (without any…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.