Jasper v. MusclePharm Corp.
United States District Court for the District of Colorado
2015 WL 2375945 (2015)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Ramona Jasper (plaintiff) bought FitMiss Fat-Burning dietary supplements made by MusclePharm Corp. (defendant). The label claimed that the product caused fat-burning and rapid weight loss with visible changes within two weeks, but Jasper did not experience those effects. Jasper sued asserting that the false labelling misled consumers and included a claim under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA). MusclePharm moved to dismiss that claim on the ground that the MMWA does not apply to products already regulated by the Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act (FDCA). Jasper argued that the MMWA still applied to some of the FitMiss labelling but failed to identify which portions did not fall under FDCA regulation. The magistrate judge assigned to the case recommended dismissing the MMWA claim, and neither party objected. The district court reviewed the magistrate’s recommendation and issued its opinion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Arguello, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.