Johnson & Johnson ‘Oil-Free’ False Ad Suit Uses Odd And Contradictory Logic To Define Oil

Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. is asking an Illinois federal court to dismiss a proposed class action alleging its “oil-free” products contain oils, arguing that reasonable buyers wouldn’t use the definition of “oils” that the named plaintiff proposes, according to a report in Law 360.

In a motion to dismiss, the company argued that while the plaintiff defined “oils” in the complaint as any substance at least partly fat-soluble, that definition wouldn’t be shared by reasonable consumers. Pointing out that criteria encompasses a wide variety of materials and ingredients with very different functions and qualities, including vitamins.

The company added that the plaintiff doesn’t even allege she understood “oils” to have that definition. They also pointed out that several of the criteria the complaint uses to further define an oil are inconsistent, such as saying an oil must be lighter than water while listing materials that are heavier than water and calling them oils.

The plaintiff also doesn’t claim to have paid a premium for the products, or that the products failed to perform, the company said.