Joint Juice Class Action Lawsuit Says Product Doesn’t Lubricate Joints

A class action lawsuit alleging that Joint Juice doesn’t really lubricate joints as advertised has been removed to federal court. 

Plaintiff Patricia Bland says she purchased 6-packs of 8-ounce ready-to-drink bottles of Joint Juice multiple times between 2015 and January 2018.

She claims that Joint Juice is advertised as a line of joint health dietary supplements that will support and nourish cartilage, lubricating joints, and improve joint comfort.

However, Bland argues that these claims are false because the product’s main ingredient does not promote joint health.

The Joint Juice class action lawsuit states that Bland and other consumers were misled into believing that the product would help their joint health, because they relied on the product’s packaging to make their purchasing decision.

The plaintiff notes that there is no other reason why customers buy Joint Juice other than to improve their joint health, so the fact that the product does not improve joint health causes financial injury to customers who purchase the product.

According to the Joint Juice class action lawsuit, Joint Juice marketing materials state in numerous locations that the product “helps keep cartilage lubricated and flexible,” and that customers should “drink daily for healthy, flexible joints.”

The Joint Juice class action lawsuit says that the product contains the active ingredients chondroitin sulfate and glucosamine hydrochloride, which is a combination of glucosamine (an amino sugar compound produced by the body and which can be isolated from shellfish).

Allegedly, Joint Juice’s makers claim that these are the ingredients that will improve joint health. However, Bland says that glucosamine is not effective in providing joint health benefits, whether used alone or in combination with other ingredients including chondroitin sulfate.

To support this claim, Bland says that research conducted by the National Institute of Health has indicated that glucosamine is not effective at “producing joint health benefits, including pain, stiffness, range of motion, flexibility, and cartilage benefits.”

The Joint Juice class action lawsuit states that the product is primarily marketed towards people with osteoarthritis, especially those in the early stages or those who have yet to be formally diagnosed and wish to take steps to improve their health.

Bland argues that Premier Nutrition Corporation, the company that makes Joint Juice, relies on customers’ desire to improve joint health in order to sell their product.

The Joint Juice class action claims that Premier Nutrition Corporation knew or should have known that scientific research indicates that the main ingredient in their product is not effective, but markets and sells the products as if they are effective in an effort to maximize their profits.

Bland is represented by Timothy G. Blood, Leslie E. Hurst, Thomas J. O’Reardon II, and Paula R. Brown of Blood Hurst & O’Reardon LLP; by Craig M. Peters of Altair Law; and by Todd D. Carpenter of Carlson Lynch Sweet Kilpela & Carpenter LLP.

The Joint Juice False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Patricia Bland v. Premier Nutrition Corporation, Case No. 3:19-cv-00875, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.