Coppertone Class Action Lawsuit Challenges Sunscreen SPF Ratings

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.

A New Jersey federal court will hear class action claims alleging the SPF ratings on some Coppertone sunscreens are grossly overstated.

Originally filed in New Jersey Superior Court by plaintiff Andrew Roseman, this Coppertone false advertising class action lawsuit has since been removed to federal court.

Roseman is accusing defendants Bayer Healthcare LLC and Merck & Co. Inc. of falsely representing the SPF, or sun protection factor, of the spray and lotion versions of Coppertone Sport High Performance SPF 30 sunscreen.

SPF is a measure of a sunscreen’s ability to prevent sunburn and protect skin from ultraviolet radiation. The number is an approximate measure of how much longer a person who uses the sunscreen can be exposed to the sun without getting burned.

So a sunscreen labeled “SPF 30” should allow a person who uses it to 30 times more sunburn-free sun exposure than they would be able to without that sunscreen, Roseman claims.

Roseman says he bought Coppertone Sport High Performance SPF 30 sunscreen on several occasions and as recently as August 2017. He says he picked that particular product in reliance on the label’s representation that it had an SPF of 30.

Had he and the proposed Class Members known the SPF number was false, Roseman claims, they never would have purchased that Coppertone sunscreen.

All sunscreens are required to clearly display their SPF rating on their label, according to this Coppertone class action lawsuit. But Roseman claims product testing has revealed that the SPF 30 Coppertone sunscreens at issue here do not actually provide an SPF of 30.

In July 2017, Roseman says, Consumer Reports published test results that showed Coppertone Sport High Performance SPF 30 sunscreen had an actual SPF that varied as much as 50 percent below the SPF stated on the label. Consumer Reports gave the sunscreen an overall rating of 40 out of 100, Roseman says.

Roseman claims he also arranged for his own independent testing of the sunscreen’s SPF. Results of that testing allegedly showed the “SPF 30” labeled sunscreen spray had an actual SPF of only 13.9, and the lotion’s actual SPF was only 14.8.

These lower SPFs don’t even satisfy Coppertone’s own recommendations for sun protection, Roseman claims. He quotes promotional materials on the Coppertone website that recommend using a sunscreen of SPF 30 or more. And the package labeling for Coppertone Sport High Performance SPF 30 products allegedly recommends use of a sunscreen with a broad-spectrum SPF of 15 or higher.

Roseman seeks to represent a statewide Class including all New Jersey citizens who purchased Coppertone Sport High Performance SPF 30 sunscreen spray or lotion in New Jersey since Nov. 2, 2011.

He is asking the court for an injunction preventing Bayer and Merck from continuing the alleged misrepresentation and to conduct a corrective marketing campaign. He also seeks an award of damages, restitution, and a $100 penalty for each Class Member under the New Jersey Truth in Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act.

Roseman is represented by attorneys Stephen P. DeNittis, Joseph Osefchen and Shane T. Prince of DeNittis Osefchen Prince PC, and by Janine Lee Pollack, Theodore B. Bell and Carl V. Malmstrom of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP.

The Coppertone False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Roseman v. Bayer Healthcare LLC and Merck & Co. Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-13308, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

UPDATE: On Jan. 9, 2018, Bayer and Merck argued that a class action lawsuit alleging Coppertone Sport sunscreen SPF levels are overstated should be dismissed.