Pixi class action alleges company’s collagen products don’t actually contain collagen

Pixi collagen class action overview: 

• Who: A Brooklyn man has sued cosmetics brand Pixi.
• Why: Plaintiff Brian Kelly alleges the company misled customers by stating that its products contain collagen.
• Where: The Pixi class action lawsuit was filed in a New York federal court.

A Brooklyn man has hit cosmetics brand Pixi with a class action lawsuit alleging it misled customers by falsely claiming that its products contain collagen.

Plaintiff Brian Kelly filed the class action complaint against Pixi Inc. on Aug. 12 in a New York federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer protection laws.

According to the lawsuit, Pixi makes and sells its “Collagen” cosmetics across the United States, including New York. 

The company prominently markets these products as containing collagen, a protein widely known for its anti-aging benefits for skin, hair and nails, the Pixi class action says. 

However, Kelly alleges the products do not contain any actual collagen. Instead, they use a synthetic substitute derived from the bark and stems of the Acacia seyal tree, known as acacia seyal gum extract, the lawsuit says.

Other companies tell the truth, Pixi collagen lawsuit says

Kelly argues that this substitute is a “far cry” from genuine collagen, which is not found in plants. 

He alleges that other cosmetic brands that market their products as containing collagen actually include the real ingredient, making Pixi’s claims particularly deceptive. 

The lawsuit says that Pixi’s allegedly misleading conduct has allowed the company to profit unjustly at the expense of consumers.

Kelly says he bought and used the Pixi’s “Botanical Collagen & Retinol Serum,” being drawn to the company’s cosmetics because the packaging said it contained collagen. 

He says he relied on these claims when deciding to pay a premium for Pixi’s products over other options that did not claim to contain collagen.

Kelly alleges that had he known the truth—that the products contained only a plant-based substitute—he wouldn’t have bought it or would have paid significantly less for it. He seeks to represent all U.S. consumers who purchased Pixi’s “Collagen” cosmetics. He’s seeking certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs, and a jury trial.

Meanwhile, L’Oreal USA Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit alleging it misled customers about the collagen ingredients in its anti-aging products.

What do you think of the allegations in this Pixi collagen lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Adrian Gucovschi, Benjamin Rozenshteyn and Nathaniel Haim Sari of Gucovschi Rozenshteyn PLLC.

The Pixi collagen class action lawsuit is Brian Kelly v. Pixi Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-05635 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. 

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Suntegrity recalls sunscreen foundation due to mold contamination
• Recent sunscreen class actions allege false advertising
• Babe lash, brow products sold without prescription, notice of side effects, class action claims
• Proactiv class action alleges benzoyl peroxide acne products degrade into carcinogen