Iovate Can’t Dodge Six Star N.O. Fury Class Action Lawsuit

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.

Dietary supplement giant Iovate Health Sciences Inc. must face a class action lawsuit accusing the company of falsely advertising its line of muscle-building supplements called Six Star Pro Nutrition N.O., after a federal judge dismissed its arguments for dismissal.

The Six Star Pro N.O. Fury class action lawsuit was filed in August 2013 by Patrick Hesano, who purchased the muscle-building supplement on March 29, 2013.  After allegedly seeing no results, Hesano sued Iovate, alleging that while the product promised increased physical performance, more efficient blood circulation, and weight loss, the drug provided no such benefits.

To add to the false advertising charges, Hesano also accused the company of using misleading statements, which suggested the supplements were backed by scientific evidence, based on the language used on the drug’s label.

The supplement’s label explained that the product mimicked the body’s amino acid L-arginine, which is instrumental in increasing blood flow to the muscles during exercise.

However, according to scientific studies, oral L-arginine supplements do not metabolize and convert into those useful hormones, the class action lawsuit says.  Instead, these supplements increase the body’s plasma arginine levels, providing no greater benefit to the consumer than normal exercise.  Yet, Iovate advertised Six Star Pro N.O. Fury as “engineered to ignite massive muscle pumps, and deliver a precise dose of arginine, a nitric oxide precursor.”

On Jan. 15, U.S. District Judge Willion Q. Hayes rejected Iovate’s argument that the misbranding claims brought under California’s Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law are preempted by the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

Iovate also argued that the class action did not have enough evidence to accuse the company of false advertising, alleging “lack of substantiation” in advertising claims, for which the case would have been dismissed under California law.  Judge Hayes denied this argument, finding that the plaintiff had proved the falsity in Iovate’s representations by pointing to several scientific studies that directly contradicted the product’s advertising claims that Six Star Pro would “provide increased formation of Nitric Oxide in the blood, increase circulation of oxygen and nutrients, enhance athletic performance, increase lean muscle mass, and provide muscle ‘pumps.’”

Additionally, Judge Hayes found that Hesano had shown that he relied on the given information from Iovate at the time, according to the various advertisements regarding the product.

The plaintiff is represented by Nick Suciu III of Oliver Law Group PC and Jonathan Shub ofSeeger Weiss LLP.

The Iovate Six Star Pro N.O. Fury Class Action Lawsuit is Hesano v. Iovate Health Sciences Inc., et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-01960, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.