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:
- Johnson & Johnson asked a New Jersey federal judge to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging Tylenol Rapid Release Gels do not work as advertised.
- The motion to dismiss was filed Sept. 23 in a New Jersey federal court, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing for injunctive relief as they are already aware of the alleged deceptive business practices.
- Lead plaintiff Edward Hernandez claimed that he and other consumers were duped by Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol Rapid Release as the product actually works more slowly than regular versions of the painkiller.
- “Because plaintiffs are now well aware that Tylenol Rapid Release Gelcaps do not work faster at relieving pain than Tylenol tablets, they could not possibly ‘be deceived again into buying the Gelcaps ‘without being aware’ of this basis for their own theory of allegedly deceptive marketing,” Johnson & Johnson says.
(May 22, 2020)
A federal judge ruled that a class action lawsuit alleging Tylenol Rapid Release Gels do not work as advertised will, for the most part, move forward.
Lead plaintiff Edward Hernandez claimed that he and other consumers were duped by Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol Rapid Release time.
According to the complaint, the drug maker advertised the Rapid Release Gels as “fast working,” but the product worked more slowly than regular versions of the pain killer.
The Johnson & Johnson class action lawsuit allegations include violations of California law, the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, breach of implied and express warranty, and violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, as well as for unjust enrichment.
Johnson & Johnson filed a motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit in September 2019, arguing the advertising that the plaintiff saw induced him and others to purchase Tylenol Rapid Release Gels was “mere puffery.”
Companies sometimes say that their advertising claims should not induce consumers to buy a product because they are so outrageous and generalized, calling the claims “puffery” for the product they are trying to sell.
U.S. District Court Judge Brian R. Martinotti disagreed with the company, finding that reasonable consumers could construe advertised Tylenol Rapid Release time as a factual statement on which to base their purchase.
“Significantly, Plaintiffs cite two cases in the District of California that expressly found the same ‘rapid release’ language to be actionable non-puffery that ‘would plausibly lead to the conclusion that a reasonable consumer could interpret the [rapid release] labels to contain factual statements upon which [plaintiff] could rely,’” the judge’s opinion states.
The order further notes that the Tylenol Rapid Release time class action lawsuit “provide[s] detailed allegations regarding specific representations made in Defendant’s extensive marketing campaign as well as those made on the product packaging and labelling” as well as “how each individual Plaintiff was misled by the products advertisements.”
Additionally, the class action lawsuit pointed to a study showing that the Rapid Release Gels dissolved at a slower rate than usual tablets and that Johnson & Johnson should have known of the study.
The plaintiff was also able to preserve claims for unjust enrichment.
“Plaintiffs allege they are entitled to relief because J&J sold the Rapid Release Gelcaps ‘by making false, misleading, and/or deceptive representations about the products’ speed and capabilities’ and ‘unjustly charged . . . a premium to purchase the’ Gelcaps and therefore ‘obtained monies that rightfully belong’ to Plaintiffs,” noted the judge’s order denying dismissal of the class action claims of unjust enrichment.
The Tylenol Rapid Relief class action lawsuit was trimmed of warranty-based claims and its claims made under California Consumer Protection laws.
According to the court order, Johnson & Johnson correctly pointed out that the plaintiff’s claim that the company violated the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, a federal law, was precluded by Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act regulations.
Similarly, claims based on the Song-Beverly Act, as well as for breach of express and implied warranties, were trimmed.
Judge Martinotti found that the Tylenol Rapid Release Gels class action lawsuit failed to state these claims with sufficient particularity.
Specifically, the judge noted that the Song-Beverley Act only applies to non-consumables; however, the plaintiff acknowledged that Tylenol Rapid Release Gels are consumed.
“Plaintiffs attempt to salvage the claim by stating the Song-Beverly Act encompasses ‘consumables accompanied by an express warranty,’” states the order. “Again, Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate the existence of an express warranty. Therefore, their Song-Beverly Act claim fails.”
The plaintiff’s allegation that Johnson & Johnson violated an express warranty made to consumers failed because the complaint didn’t point out any comparative statements made about the product in the marketing or advertising of the product, concluded the judge.
Further, class action lawsuit claims that the company breached an implied warranty to consumers also failed. This time because the complaint acknowledged that, despite allegations that the product did not live up to its marketing claims for fast pain relief, Tylenol Rapid Relief meets the “minimum level of quality necessary.”
The Tylenol Rapid Release time class action lawsuit seeks to represent California consumers who purchased any Tylenol acetaminophen products marked as “rapid release,” including Tylenol Extra Strength Rapid Release Gels, Tylenol PM Rapid Release Gels. The plaintiff is seeking a nationwide recall of the product, as well as damages on behalf of the proposed Class.
Have you taken Tylenol Rapid Release Gels? What do you think of the Tylenol Rapid Release time? Tell us your opinion in the comment section below!
The lead plaintiff is represented by Crystal Foley and Mitchell M. Breit of Simmons Hanly Conroy.
The Johnson & Johnson Tylenol Rapid Release Time Class Action Lawsuit is Hernandez v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., Case No. 3:19-cv15679, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru vehicle data collection class action lawsuit investigation
May 17, 2024 | Legal News
556 thoughts onTylenol class action over rapid release gelcaps seeks dismissal
You may add me. I have had extensive experience with this product. My son has an unusual condition in which his body has no ‘internal thermostat’, which means his body is ineffective in regulating his own temperature under fever conditions. When contracting viral or bacterial infections that are accompanied by fever, his temp can be normal one minute (he usually runs a little hot, so about 99.1-99.3 is normal for him), and the next minute he is at 106. It has been this way since he was a baby, and he is now 21 and a college senior. Does not matter the measuring device; under the tongue, in ear, forehead, scan…all the same result. Take temp., normal, you think, that cannot be right, he feels warm, take it again immediately, and instantly off the chart. The only way to keep his temperature in a “manageable” range (103-104) when he runs fever and not exceeding the 106 mark, is to alternately administer dosages of Tylenol and Motrin at 1 hour intervals initially, and then every other hour thereafter round the clock. We have followed this regimen per his pediatrician (which he now no longer sees) since he was a baby, and have been told to follow this protocol by ER nurses as well. On several occasions, including the last time he was ill, I purchased the Rapid Release Tylenol, because we need for the product to start to work asap, since it can go into the critical zone quickly resulting in seizure, of which he has a history of now. So I have given him the Rapid Releases on various occasions, but even had questions myself as to if in fact, it really is any faster than regular tylenol, and it sure is expensive. But both seem to begin to alleviate fever in about the same 20 minute time frame. My son, a chemistry major, believes this is because the absorption rate of the drug is going to be the same regardless, and has nothing to do with the actual release of the drug more quickly or slowly, unless it is the timed release-which he says a slower dissolve will allow a slower active ingredient to be disseminated across a longer period of time in the body, rather than all at once. I’m thinking the drug would not work as well in that case, because it would have to be a lower dosage it would seem…but who knows. All I know is rapid release or no rapid release…the ability of the product to have affect the symptom is not improved with faster release in our extensive experience. Perhaps individuals have slightly different absorption rates, maybe…and perhaps empty or full stomach has affect on drug ability to move more quickly or slowly thru body to relieve symptoms, but it does not state this on the bottle, because we have looked, yet I would imagine that it would, and it would be helpful to know this in an emergency condition such as we have had on numerous occasions. Even tho I know the product is more expensive ( I think I paid in the neighborhood of $28.00 for a bottle during CoVid to have onhand vs. about $13.00), and I agonized over spending the extra money, but my ‘fears’ won out once again, and I spent the money, because knowing Covid is accompanied by conditions of high fever, I want to err on the side of most precautionary, and ended up purchasing the more expensive bottle, holding out hope that by some miracle if I need it, it will work faster than if I’d just bought the regular bottle. When we initially started purchasing the product, was hoping to see a decline of his fever in 5 maybe 10 minutes, but it was still some 20 minutes before seeing any difference, which is the same as the regular tylenol. It’s probably a hard thing to measure in individuals. I don’t know how they can make this claim, really. They should probably call it “Rapid Dissolve * Individual Rates of relieve may vary depending on the individual”.
Please add me. I always thought being rapid relieve meant quicky. More so than a regular Tylenol.
Add me please
Please add me
I use to take them when i knew i was getting a headache and it never work and it definitely does work if you take it for pain.
Add me please
Add me
Following please add
Please add me to the lawsuit. I have taken these for pain for over 20 years with really no reliable relief.
Add me please
I make sure I alway buy the gel Tylenol thinking they were faster. I didn’t find much relief taking the gel for awhile now. It was the same as taking store brand one. I actually just bought a bottle of gel Tylenos in case I needed it for this virus. Wish I saw this before. Please add my name.