This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 10/30/2021 at 08:06:09 (UTC).

Lopez et al v. L'Oreal USA, Inc.

Case Summary

On August 31, 2021, Rocio Lopez and Rachel Lumbra (“Plaintiffs''), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, represented by Alec Mitchell Leslie of Bursor & Fisher, P.A., filed a class action lawsuit against L’Oreal USA, Inc. (“Defendant” or “L’Oreal”), seeking injunctive relief and damages along with prejudgment interests, among other reliefs, for the alleged false and misleading representation of the Defendant’s product. This case was filed in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York with Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr presiding. 

In the complaint, the Plaintiffs alleged that, “Defendant markets and sells the Products as “collagen” skincare that “restore [the] skin’s cushion” and “smooth wrinkles.” However, collagen as a topical product is worthless because it cannot penetrate the top layer of skin to provide such benefits. Accordingly, Defendant’s representations regarding the skin-firming and anti-aging benefits of the Products are false and misleading” and “Defendant has therefore engaged in widespread false and deceptive advertising of its Products by claiming the Products are “collagen” that “restore [the] skin’s cushion” and “smooth wrinkles.” Every package of the Products prominently claims that the Products have these anti-aging and skin restoring qualities.”

The Plaintiffs further alleged that, “On information and belief, Defendant did know that the Products were ineffective and unable to live up to their labeling claims, but chose to include the representations anyway because those labeling claims allow Defendant to sell the Products at a price premium compared to products that do not contain such claims.”

The Plaintiffs also alleged that, “Plaintiffs and Class Members relied to their detriment on Defendant’s representations that the Products would actually have an anti-aging effect on their skin” and “Plaintiff Lumbra purchased the Products for her own personal use. In doing so, Plaintiff Lumbra relied upon Defendant’s false, misleading, and deceptive representations that the Products would smooth her wrinkles and restore her skin’s cushion. Plaintiff Lumbra spent money in the transaction that she otherwise would not have spent had she known the truth about Defendant’s advertising claims.”

There are six claims of relief laid down by the Plaintiffs. The first claim is for the alleged violation of New York’s Gen. Bus. Law § 349 on behalf of the New York Subclass. The second claim is for the alleged violation of New York’s Gen. Bus. Law § 350 on behalf of New York Subclass. The third claim is for the alleged breach of express warranty on behalf of the Class. The fourth claim is for the alleged violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act California Civil Code § 1750, et seq. The fifth claim is for the alleged violation of California’s False Advertising Law (“FAL”), Business & Professions Code § 17500 et seq. The sixth claim is for the alleged Unlawful Business Practices in violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Business & Professions Code §§ 17200 et seq. (Unlawful Practices).

In their prayer for relief, the Plaintiffs requested the Court certify this action as a class action and name Plaintiffs as the representatives of the Class. Further, the Plaintiffs also requested the Court for declaratory relief and permanent injunctive relief along with disgorgement and restitution of all monies Defendants acquired by means of unlawful practices; costs and expenses along with reasonable attorneys’ fees; and any other relief the court deems just and proper. 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    1:21-CV-07300

  • Filing Date:

    08/31/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Personal Property Fraud

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Andrew L. Carter, Jr

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

Rocio Lopez

Rachel Lumbra

Defendant

L'Oreal USA, Inc.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Alec Mitchell Leslie

Attorney at Bursor & Fisher, P.A.

888 Seventh Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Defendant Attorney

Russell E. Taylor

Attorney at Farella Braun & Martel, LLP

Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street

San Francisco, CA 94104

 

Court Documents

#11

(#11) ORDER granting #9 Motion for Russell Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 10/7/2021) (ate) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

#10

(#10) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT amending #1 Complaint against L'Oreal USA, Inc. with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Rocio Lopez, Rachel Lumbra. Related document: #1 Complaint..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

9 #4

Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice

9 #3

Affidavit Affidavit ISO Motion for Pro Hac Vice

9 #2

Certificate Supreme Court State of Colorado

9 #1

Certificate Supreme Court State of CA

9 #9

Main Document

8 #4

Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice

8 #3

Affidavit Affidavit In Support of Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice

8 #2

Certificate Supreme Court State of Colorado

8 #1

Certificate Supreme Court State of California

8 #8

Main Document

#7

(#7) STIPULATION RE AMENDED COMPLAINT: 1. Plaintiffs have stated their intent to amend their Complaint by October 7, 2021, with respect to Count IV (Violation of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code section 1750 et seq.) to add a claim for damages. This amendment shall not affect Plaintiffs' right to amend their pleading once as a matter of course under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 15(a)(1). Plaintiffs shall therefore file the amended complaint no later than October 7, 2021. 2. L'Oral shall not be required to file its response, whether by answer or motion, to the complaint or amended complaint until 30 days after the filing of the amended complaint. 3. L'Oral does not waive any arguments or defenses that otherwise could be asserted in their response, whether by answer or motion. (Amended Pleadings due by 10/7/2021.) (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/23/2021) (jca) (Entered: 09/23/2021)

6 #1

[PROPOSED] Order

6 #6

Main Document

#5

(#5) SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED. L'Oreal USA, Inc. served on 9/7/2021, answer due 9/28/2021. Document filed by Rocio Lopez; Rachel Lumbra..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 09/10/2021)

#4

#1

11 More Documents Available
View All Documents

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/07/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#11) ORDER granting #9 Motion for Russell Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 10/7/2021) (ate) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/07/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#10) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT amending #1 Complaint against L'Oreal USA, Inc. with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Rocio Lopez, Rachel Lumbra. Related document: #1 Complaint..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/06/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket>>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. #9 MOTION for Russell E. Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (aea) (Entered: 10/06/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/05/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#9) MOTION for Russell E. Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by L'Oreal USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate Supreme Court State of CA, #2 Certificate Supreme Court State of Colorado, #3 Affidavit Affidavit ISO Motion for Pro Hac Vice, #4 Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice).(Taylor, Russell) (Entered: 10/05/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/30/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket>>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. #8 MOTION for Russell E. Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-25129466. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff... The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): Affidavit is not notarized.;. Re-file the motion as a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Proposed Order.. (wb) (Entered: 09/30/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/29/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#8) FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - MOTION for Russell E. Taylor to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-25129466. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by L'Oreal USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Certificate Supreme Court State of California, #2 Certificate Supreme Court State of Colorado, #3 Affidavit Affidavit In Support of Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice, #4 Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice).(Taylor, Russell) Modified on 9/30/2021 (wb). (Entered: 09/29/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#7) STIPULATION RE AMENDED COMPLAINT: 1. Plaintiffs have stated their intent to amend their Complaint by October 7, 2021, with respect to Count IV (Violation of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code section 1750 et seq.) to add a claim for damages. This amendment shall not affect Plaintiffs' right to amend their pleading once as a matter of course under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 15(a)(1). Plaintiffs shall therefore file the amended complaint no later than October 7, 2021. 2. L'Oral shall not be required to file its response, whether by answer or motion, to the complaint or amended complaint until 30 days after the filing of the amended complaint. 3. L'Oral does not waive any arguments or defenses that otherwise could be asserted in their response, whether by answer or motion. (Amended Pleadings due by 10/7/2021.) (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/23/2021) (jca) (Entered: 09/23/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#6) PROPOSED STIPULATION AND ORDER. Document filed by L'Oreal USA, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 [PROPOSED] Order).(Taylor, Russell) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/10/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#5) SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED. L'Oreal USA, Inc. served on 9/7/2021, answer due 9/28/2021. Document filed by Rocio Lopez; Rachel Lumbra..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 09/10/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/01/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#4) ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to L'Oreal USA, Inc...(gp) (Entered: 09/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/01/2021

  • DocketCase Designated ECF. (gp) (Entered: 09/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/01/2021

  • DocketMagistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (gp) (Entered: 09/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/01/2021

  • DocketCASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(gp) (Entered: 09/01/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#3) REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to L'Oreal USA, Inc., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Rocio Lopez, Rachel Lumbra..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 08/31/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#2) CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 08/31/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/31/2021
  • View Court Documents

  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT against L'Oreal USA, Inc.. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-25001220)Document filed by Rocio Lopez, Rachel Lumbra..(Leslie, Alec) (Entered: 08/31/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Why is this public record being published online?

UniCourt uses cookies to improve your online experience, for more information please see our Privacy Policy. By continuing to use this website, you agree to UniCourt’s General Disclaimer, Terms of Service, Cancellation and Refund Policy, Privacy Policy, and Public Records Policy. If you do not agree with these terms, then do not use our website and/or services.