Abraham Lizama purchased a turquoise sweater from H&M’s “Conscious Choice” collection, a line of clothing “created with a little extra consideration for the planet” which generally include “at least 50% of more sustainable materials.” Although we imagine that Lizama looked quite handsome in his sweater, he soon regretted his purchase and filed a class action against the retailer, accusing it of greenwashing because the sweater did not meet his view about what’s good for the environment.

Lizama argued that H&M misled consumers into thinking that its Conscious Choice collection was “environmentally friendly.” (By our count, that phrase appears more than 100 times in the complaint.) The court pointed out, though, that H&M never actually uses that phrase to describe its garments. Moreover, H&M does not represent that its Conscious Choice products are “sustainable” – only that the line includes “more sustainable materials” and its “most sustainable products,” which the court said are obvious comparisons to H&M’s regular materials.

Lizama argued that the garments were not sustainable because recycling PET plastics into clothing isn’t as good for the environment as recycling those plastics into plastic bottles. Even if that’s the case, the court noted that the comparison wasn’t relevant in determining whether H&M’s claims were misleading. “Instead, the relevant comparison is whether one garment using recycled polyester is more sustainable than another garment using non-recycled (also known as virgin) polyester.”

Continue Reading H&M Wins Dismissal in Greenwashing Suit

The FTC has made news recently with its recent enforcement activity regarding companies’ alleged disclosures of consumer health data, as detailed in our recent post FTC to Advertisers: We’re tracking Your Use of Health information, and as evidenced by the FTC’s tentative agenda for its next open meeting later this month on potential rulemaking regarding amending the Health Data Breach Notification Rule (a point which is curious given its prior policy statement already attempting to expand its scope, which we discussed here).

Aside from regulators, however, Plaintiffs’ lawyers also are paying attention to the FTC’s activity of law, and, on a parallel track, has initiated a wave of consumer class actions regarding the use of tracking pixels and consumers’ “health information” have followed. We anticipate this wave will only increase in response to Washington’s My Health, My Data Act once in effect.

Continue Reading The FTC is Not the Only One Tracking Your Use of Health Information

Last week, two Washington consumers filed a proposed class action lawsuit accusing Old Navy of spamming them with emails that included false or misleading information about the duration of sales. For example, the complaint alleges that:

  • Some emails advertised that products were on sale “today only” or “this week only.” The next day (or the

While it may be common knowledge for many that state attorneys general (State AGs) bring enforcement actions under state consumer protection laws, it is likely less well-known that the State AGs also serve a role under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). State AGs typically receive notice through CAFA as “appropriate state officials” if the

Anyone who has strolled the supermarket alcohol aisle in recent months may fairly stand in awe of the proliferation of boozy and not-so-boozy drinks in pretty packages, with small cans and pastel colors making it difficult to immediately discern whether they contain alcohol and, if so, how much.  According to Nielsen data, in 2021,

Last month, plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against YouTube (and its parent company Google), alleging that the company violates Oregon laws by automatically renewing paid subscriptions to premium music, television, and video streaming services without adequately disclosing the offer terms or getting consent.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company violated Oregon’s automatic renewal