Plaintiff voluntarily dismisses L’Oreal mascara class action

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Update:

• A consumer in California voluntarily dismissed in their entirety claims against L’Oréal USA Inc. in April 2022.
• The dismissal ended claims L’Oréal intentionally hid from consumers that some of its waterproof mascaras allegedly contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). 
• The claims were initially filed in a Northern California federal court in February 2022. 
• The consumer claimed L’Oréal was in violation of both state and federal consumer protection laws by not disclosing the alleged presence of PFAS, which they argued were toxic substances. 
• The dismissal was made without prejudice and came two days after an order extending time for response to the complaint. 

L’Oréal Mascara Toxic Substance Class Action Overview:

• Who: L’Oréal USA, Inc. is being sued by a mascara customer.
• Why: The consumer alleges L’Oréal intentionally hides the fact that some of its waterproof mascaras contain a toxic substance.
• Where: The lawsuit was filed in a California federal court.

(Feb. 24, 2022)

L’Oréal hides that its popular waterproof mascara products contain toxic substances, according to a new class action lawsuit.

Plaintiff Sumner Davenport filed the class action complaint against L’Oréal USA Inc. on Feb. 22 in a California federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws. 

According to Davenport, L’Oréal, one of the largest cosmetics companies in the world, intentionally fails to disclose to consumers that its popular waterproof mascara products contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, despite the fact it knew or should have known that the information is material to consumers.

“Instead, L’Oréal represented that its waterproof mascaras were safe, effective, high-quality and appropriate for use on consumers’ eyelashes,” Davenport says.

What L’Oréal did not tell consumers is that PFAS, which can have adverse effects on humans and can bioaccumulate in human’s bodies, are present in detectable amounts in its waterproof mascaras, she alleges. 

“Even very low levels of PFAS can be toxic to humans,” the lawsuit states. “This risk is particularly high where the PFAS are applied near the eyes, as is the case with mascara products.”

L’Oréal waterproof mascara misleadingly, fraudulently advertised, plaintiff alleges

The plaintiff alleges that from at least 2018, L’Oréal’s waterproof mascara was misleadingly and fraudulently advertised because it failed to disclose the presence of PFAS. 

She says if she’d known about the toxic substances, she wouldn’t have bought the product and certainly not at the price point it was advertised at.

Davenport says she sought out an independent laboratory to detect the PFAS. The testing found PFAS were present within several popular L’Oréal waterproof mascara products: L’Oréal Voluminous Waterproof Mascara, Voluminous Lash ParadiseTM, Waterproof Mascara, Maybelline Volum’ Express the Falsies Waterproof Mascara, Maybelline Volum’ Express Total Temptation Waterproof Mascara, Maybelline Great Lash Waterproof Mascara and Maybelline Total Temptation Waterproof Mascara.

The plaintiff looking to represent anyone in California who purchased the mascara products from 2018 to now.

Davenport is suing for violation of California consumer laws plus breach of warranty and unjust enrichment. She’s seeking certification of the class action lawsuit, an injunction forcing L’Oréal to relabel the products, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial.

Meanwhile, L’Oréal USA is also facing a class action lawsuit alleging it uses Paris representations and French text to mislead consumers into believing its products are made in France. 

Check out Top Class Actions’ list of the worst makeup brands in America, according to the number of class action lawsuits they are facing.

Join a toxic makeup class action lawsuit investigation (links to paid attorney advertising).

The plaintiff is represented by Devin Bolton and James Bilsborrow of Weitz & Luxenberg PC, Seeger Weiss LLP and Turke & Strauss LL

The L’Oréal USA class action lawsuit is Sumner Davenport v. L’Oréal USA, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-01195, in the U.S District Court Central District of California

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• bareMinerals Class Action Claims Makeup Contains Harmful Manmade Chemicals
• Talc Makeup & Other Products: Are They Safe?
• Ulta Employees Denied Breaks, Overtime, Sick Pay, Says Class Action Lawsuit
• Target Virtual Try-On for Makeup Collects Facial Data for Research, Class Action Alleges