We are pleased to report a key early victory in our consumer protection lawsuit against New Chapter, Inc., a well-known supplement company accused of misleading marketing practices. On June 4, 2025, Judge Hernan D. Vera of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied New Chapter’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, allowing our client’s claims to move forward toward discovery and potential class certification.
The case, brought on behalf of lead plaintiff Tinamarie Barrales, challenges the labeling of New Chapter’s Fiber Gummies and Kids Organic Fiber Gummies. The lawsuit alleges that the company falsely represents the amount of fiber per serving and misleads consumers into believing that the “Kids” version of the product is specially formulated for children, when in fact it is identical to the regular version. Plaintiff alleges that these misrepresentations caused her and other consumers to overpay for products that do not provide the nutritional value or tailored formulation that New Chapter’s marketing suggests.
New Chapter attempted to have the case dismissed by arguing, among other things, that the claims were preempted by federal law, that the plaintiff lacked standing, and that no reasonable consumer could be misled by the labeling. Judge Vera rejected all of these arguments. The Court held that plaintiff adequately alleged that she was misled by the representations on the front label and would not have purchased the products—or paid as much for them—had she known the truth. The Court further ruled that the claims are not preempted by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as they are based on how the product was marketed to consumers, not how the company calculated serving size in its nutrition panel. The Court also concluded that it is plausible consumers could be misled by the “4g prebiotic fiber” statement, which appears to refer to a single gummy, even though that is not what the product actually delivers. The same is true for the “Kids” label, which could reasonably suggest a child-specific formulation when no such distinction exists.
This decision is an important reminder that companies cannot shield themselves from liability simply by relying on fine print or back-label disclosures when they are making bold claims on the front of their packaging. In today’s marketplace, where consumers are inundated with health claims and nutritional promises, transparency and accuracy in product labeling are more important than ever. The Court’s ruling affirms that manufacturers must be held accountable when they mislead consumers, especially in industries like supplements and food where the trust between brand and buyer is central.
At Crosner Legal, we remain committed to advancing consumer rights through strategic class action litigation. We will continue to fight for accountability in the marketplace and to ensure that consumers receive truthful information about the products they buy. If you believe you have been misled by deceptive marketing or labeling, we invite you to reach out for a free consultation.
Crosner Legal
9440 Santa Monica Blvd. #301, Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Phone: (866) 276-7637 [CROSNER]
Email: intake@crosnerlegal.com
Fax: (310) 510-6429
This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.