Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 1 of 38
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`
`CASE NO. _________________
`
`
`CLASS ACTION
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`MICHELLE SCHRIVER, CAROLINA
`GONZALEZ, ACHOREA TISDALE, and
`TRACY ALLISON, individually and on
`behalf of all others similarly situated,
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`vs.
`
`UNILEVER UNITED STATES, INC.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiffs Michelle Schriver, Carolina Gonzalez, Achorea Tisdale, and Tracy Allison
`
`(together, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
`
`against Defendant Unilever United States, Inc. (“Unilever” or “Defendant”). Plaintiffs make the
`
`following allegations based upon (a) personal knowledge, (b) the investigation of counsel, and (c)
`
`information and belief.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a class action lawsuit by Plaintiffs, and others similarly situated, who
`
`purchased for normal household use Defendant’s dry shampoo products that are defective because
`
`they contain benzene, a known human carcinogen, and which were formulated, designed,
`
`manufactured, marketed, advertised, distributed, and sold by Defendant.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant distributes, markets, and sells to consumers across the United States,
`
`both in retail establishments and online, including in Florida, certain dry shampoo products under
`
`- 1 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 2 of 38
`
`
`
`its various brands, including Suave, TIGI, TRESemmé, Dove, Nexxus, and Living Proof (the
`
`“Products”).
`
`3.
`
`The presence of benzene in the Products renders them adulterated, misbranded, and
`
`illegal to sell under federal and state law.
`
`4.
`
`Given the highly dangerous levels of benzene recently found in some of its
`
`competitors’ aerosol products, as well as Unilever’s need to recall certain of its own aerosol spray
`
`deodorant products due to the presence of benzene, Unilever knew or should have known of the
`
`dangerous and carcinogenic effects of benzene and should have known that it was producing
`
`products that contained, or had a material risk of containing, benzene.
`
`5.
`
`Instead of disclosing this fact to consumers, Defendant represented that its Products
`
`are safe and effective for their intended use, touting its “strict quality controls” to “limit the
`
`presence of benzene” in its products.1 Nevertheless, Unilever has produced, marketed, labeled,
`
`distributed, and sold millions of dry shampoo Products that contained, or had a material risk of
`
`containing, benzene.
`
`6.
`
`The presence of benzene in Defendant’s Products was not disclosed to consumers
`
`in the Products’ labeling, advertising or otherwise, in violation of state and federal law. Plaintiffs
`
`and the putative class suffered economic damages due to Defendant’s misconduct (as set forth
`
`below) and seek injunctive relief and restitution for the full purchase price of the Products.
`
`Plaintiffs allege the following based upon personal knowledge as well as investigation by counsel,
`
`and as to all other matters, upon information and belief. Plaintiffs further believe that substantial
`
`evidentiary support will exist for the allegations set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for
`
`
`1 See https://www.unilever.com/brands/whats-in-our-products/your-ingredient-questions-
`answered/controlling-impurities/ (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 3 of 38
`
`
`
`discovery.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(d), because
`
`at least one putative class member is of diverse citizenship from Defendant, there are more than
`
`100 class members nationwide, and the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000,
`
`exclusive of costs and interest.
`
`8.
`
`The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant has
`
`purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting business activities in the state of Florida.
`
`Defendant has marketed, promoted, distributed, and sold the Products in Florida, and Defendant
`
`has sufficient minimum contacts with this state and/or sufficiently availed itself of the markets in
`
`this state through promotion, sales, distribution, and marketing to render the exercise of
`
`jurisdiction by this Court permissible.
`
`9.
`
`Venue is proper in this District, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, because a substantial
`
`part of the acts or omissions giving rise to the claims brought herein occurred or emanated
`
`within this District, Defendant has marketed, advertised, and sold the Products in this District,
`
`and Defendant has caused harm to class members who reside in this District. In addition, two of
`
`the Plaintiffs are residents of this District.
`
`PARTIES
`
`10.
`
`At all relevant times, Plaintiff Michelle Schriver (for purposes of this paragraph,
`
`“Plaintiff”) was a citizen and resident of West Palm Beach, Florida. Plaintiff has purchased for
`
`household use Defendant’s Products, including Dove Dry Shampoo Volume and Fullness, for
`
`approximately 3 years. Plaintiff purchased 3-packs of the Product every 3 months on amazon.com.
`
`She received her last shipment in September 2021. She spent approximately $14 on each 3-pack
`
`of the Product. Based on the false and misleading claims by Defendant, at the time of purchase,
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 4 of 38
`
`
`
`Plaintiff was unaware that Defendant’s Products were adulterated with benzene. Plaintiff
`
`purchased Defendant’s Products on the assumption that the labeling of Defendant’s Products was
`
`accurate and that the products were unadulterated, safe, and effective. Plaintiff would not have
`
`purchased Defendant’s Products had she known they contained benzene, a known human
`
`carcinogen. As a result, Plaintiff suffered injury in fact when she spent money to purchase Products
`
`she would not otherwise have purchased absent Defendant’s misconduct, as alleged herein.
`
`11.
`
`At all relevant times, Plaintiff Carolina Gonzalez (for purposes of this paragraph,
`
`“Plaintiff”) was a citizen and resident of Miami, Florida. Plaintiff has purchased for household use
`
`Defendant’s Products, including TIGI Bed Head Matte Dry Shampoo for women, Oh Bee Hive!,
`
`from amazon.com in November 2020. She has spent approximately $10 on Defendant’s Products.
`
`Based on the false and misleading claims by Defendant, at the time of purchase, Plaintiff was
`
`unaware that Defendant’s Products were adulterated with benzene. Plaintiff purchased
`
`Defendant’s Products on the assumption that the labeling of Defendant’s Products was accurate
`
`and that the products were unadulterated, safe, and effective. Plaintiff would not have purchased
`
`Defendant’s Products had she known they contained benzene, a known human carcinogen. As a
`
`result, Plaintiff suffered injury in fact when she spent money to purchase Products she would not
`
`otherwise have purchased absent Defendant’s misconduct, as alleged herein.
`
`12.
`
`At all relevant times, Plaintiff Achorea Tisdale (for purposes of this paragraph,
`
`“Plaintiff”) was a citizen and resident of Sacramento, California. Plaintiff has purchased for
`
`household use Defendant’s Products approximately every 2 months for approximately the past 2
`
`years, including Dove Dry Shampoo Volume and Fullness, which she purchased at Target on
`
`November 19, 2021. Plaintiff has purchased Defendants product at Target and Walmart in
`
`Sacramento, California. She has spent approximately $5-10 on each one of Defendant’s Products.
`
`- 4 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 5 of 38
`
`
`
`Based on the false and misleading claims by Defendant, at the time of purchase, Plaintiff was
`
`unaware that Defendant’s Products were adulterated with benzene. Plaintiff purchased
`
`Defendant’s Products on the assumption that the labeling of Defendant’s Products was accurate
`
`and that the products were unadulterated, safe, and effective. Plaintiff would not have purchased
`
`Defendant’s Products had she known they contained benzene, a known human carcinogen. As a
`
`result, Plaintiff suffered injury in fact when she spent money to purchase Products she would not
`
`otherwise have purchased absent Defendant’s misconduct, as alleged herein.
`
`13.
`
`At all relevant times, Plaintiff Tracy Allison (for purposes of this paragraph,
`
`“Plaintiff”) was a citizen and resident of Champaign, Illinois. Plaintiff has purchased for household
`
`use Dove Dry Shampoo Volume and Fullness twice on amazon.com, the first time on February
`
`14, 2021, and the second time on September 3, 2021. She has spent an approximate total of $20
`
`on Defendant’s Products. Based on the false and misleading claims by Defendant, at the time of
`
`purchase, Plaintiff was unaware that Defendant’s Products were adulterated with benzene. Plaintiff
`
`purchased Defendant’s Products on the assumption that the labeling of Defendant’s Products was
`
`accurate and that the products were unadulterated, safe, and effective. Plaintiff would not have
`
`purchased Defendant’s Products had she known they contained benzene, a known human
`
`carcinogen. As a result, Plaintiff suffered injury in fact when she spent money to purchase Products
`
`she would not otherwise have purchased absent Defendant’s misconduct, as alleged herein.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in
`
`Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Defendant sells dry shampoo Products throughout the United
`
`States, including in the state of Florida.
`
`15.
`
`Defendant is part of the Unilever Group, an international consumer goods company
`
`that is comprised of two parent companies, Unilever N.V. in Rotterdam, Netherlands and Unilever
`
`- 5 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 6 of 38
`
`
`
`PLC in London, United Kingdom. The Unilever Group operates in the United States under its
`
`subsidiary, Unilever United States, Inc., which operates as a single economic entity.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant sells and markets its Products under the
`
`names Suave, TIGI, TRESemmé, Dove, Nexxus, and Living Proof. Each product is marketed in
`
`the same or similar manner in that (i) it is a dry shampoo, (ii) it misrepresents or fails to disclose
`
`the presence of benzene (or the risk of the Product containing the same), and (iii) Defendant makes
`
`similar representations regarding the quality and safety of the Products.
`
`17.
`
`Dry shampoo products, including the Products, are considered cosmetics that are
`
`regulated by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”). The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
`
`(“FDCA”) defines cosmetics by their intended use, as “articles intended to be rubbed, poured,
`
`sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body . . . for cleansing,
`
`beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance[.]” FDCA § 201(i).
`
`18.
`
`The FDA acknowledges that “[c]osmetic companies have a legal responsibility for
`
`the safety of their products and ingredients.”2
`
`19.
`
`The FDA recognizes the high danger of the chemical benzene and lists it as a “Class
`
`1 solvent” that “should not be employed in the manufacture of drug substances, excipients, and
`
`drug products because of their unacceptable toxicity. . . However, if their use is unavoidable in
`
`order to produce a drug product with a significant therapeutic advance, then their levels should be
`
`restricted” and benzene is restricted under such guidance to 2 parts per million (“ppm”).3
`
`
`2 Cosmetic Safety Q&A: Personal Care Products (https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/resources-
`consumers-cosmetics/cosmetics-safety-qa-personal-care-
`products#:~:text=Cosmetic%20companies%20have%20a%20legal,product%20affects%20how%
`20you%20look) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`3 Food and Drug Administration, Q3C – Tables and List Guidance for Industry (2018)
`(https://www.fda.gov/media/133650/download) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`
`- 6 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 7 of 38
`
`
`
`20.
`
`Since the Products are not drugs, any amount of the benzene is unacceptable and
`
`should not be employed in the manufacture of the Products.
`
`21.
`
`Benzene is used primarily in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries, as a
`
`starting material and intermediate in the synthesis of numerous chemicals, and in gasoline. The
`
`major United States source of benzene is petroleum. The health hazards of benzene have been
`
`recognized for over one hundred years.
`
`22.
`
`According to the National Toxicology Program (“NTP”), benzene is “known to be
`
`a human carcinogen based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in humans.”4
`
`Benzene has also been “found to be carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for
`
`Research on Cancer (“IARC”).5 Benzene was “[f]irst evaluated by IARC in 1974 . . . and was
`
`found to be carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), a finding that has stood since that time.”6 As noted
`
`by the IARC:
`
`In the current evaluation, the Working Group again confirmed the carcinogenicity
`of benzene based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans, sufficient
`evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals, and strong mechanistic
`evidence. . . . In particular, benzene is metabolically activated to electrophilic
`metabolites; induces oxidative stress and associated oxidative damage to DNA; is
`genotoxic; alters DNA repair or causes genomic instability; is immunosuppressive;
`alters cell proliferation, cell death, or nutrient supply; and modulates receptor-
`mediated effects.7
`
`23.
`
`The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) states that the
`
`
`4 Benzene, Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition, DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
`SERVICES (Nov. 3, 2016) (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/benzene.pdf) (last
`visited Nov. 10, 2022) (emphasis in original).
`5 Benzene, IARC MONOGRAPHS ON THE EVALUATION OF CARCINOGENIC RISKS TO
`HUMANS, Volume 120 (2018)
`(https://publications.iarc.fr/_publications/media/download/6043/20a78ade14e86cf076c3981a9a0
`94f45da6d27cc.pdf) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`6 Id.
`7 Id. (emphasis in original).
`
`- 7 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 8 of 38
`
`
`
`Department of Health and Human Services has determined that benzene causes cancer in humans.8
`
`The World Health Organization (“WHO”) and the IARC have classified benzene as a Group 1
`
`compound thereby defining it as “carcinogenic to humans.”9
`
`24.
`
`The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (“NIOSH”) recommends
`
`protective equipment be worn by workers expecting to be exposed to benzene at concentrations of
`
`0.1 ppm and defines “inhalation, skin absorption, ingestion, skin and/or eye contact” as exposure
`
`routes.10
`
`25.
`
`The Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has estimated that lifetime
`
`exposure to benzene inhalation at 0.4 parts per billion (“ppb”), or 0.0004 ppm, will increase the
`
`risk of developing cancer in humans at the same 1 in 100,000 exposed persons rate as FDA uses
`
`to set regulatory limits on other trace impurities like N-nitrosamines.11
`
`26.
`
`The FDA instructs that there is no safe level of benzene, and thus it “should not be
`
`employed in the manufacture of drug substances, excipients, and drug products because of [its]
`
`
`8 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Facts About Benzene (2018)
`(https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/benzene/basics/facts.asp) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`9 See International Agency for Research on Cancer and World Health Organization, IARC
`Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans
`(https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`10 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The National Institute for Occupational
`Safety and Health (NIOSH), Benzene (October 30, 2019)
`(https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0049.html) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022); Centers for
`Disease Control and Prevention, The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
`BENZENE: Systemic Agent (2011)
`(https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ershdb/emergencyresponsecard_29750032.html) (last visited Nov.
`10, 2022).
`11 See Environmental Protection Agency, Benzene; CASRN 71-43-2
`(https://iris.epa.gov/static/pdfs/0276_summary.pdf) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022); Food and Drug
`Administration (February 2021), Control of Nitrosamine Impurities in Human Drugs
`(https://www.fda.gov/media/141720/download) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`
`- 8 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 9 of 38
`
`
`
`unacceptable toxicity.”12
`
`27.
`
`As previously stated, the Products are cosmetics. Among the ways a cosmetic may
`
`be adulterated are:
`
`If it consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance; or
`. . . whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health;13
`
`28.
`
`A cosmetic is misbranded “[i]f its labeling is false or misleading in any
`
`particular.”14
`
`29.
`
`The manufacture of any misbranded or adulterated cosmetic is prohibited under
`
`federal law,15 and state laws including Florida.16 The introduction into commerce of any
`
`misbranded or adulterated cosmetic is similarly prohibited.17 The receipt in interstate commerce
`
`of any adulterated or misbranded cosmetic is also unlawful.18
`
`30.
`
`In October 2022, Unilever announced that “select lot codes of dry shampoo aerosol
`
`products produced prior to October 2021 from Dove, Nexxus, Suave, TIGI (Rockaholic and Bed
`
`
`
`for
`
`Industry
`
`12
`Guidance
`List
`and
`Tables
`Q3C–2017
`FDA,
`(https://www.fda.gov/media/71737/download) (last visited Nov. 10, 2022).
`13 21 U.S.C. §351(a)(2)(B); see also Fla. Stat. § 499.006(1) & (2) (“A drug or device is adulterated,
`if any of the following apply: (1) It consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed
`substance[;] (2) It has been produced, prepared, packed, or held under conditions whereby it could
`have been contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health.”).
`14 21 U.S.C. §352(a)(1); see also Fla. Stat. § 499.007(1) (A drug is misbranded “[i]f its labeling is
`in any way false or misleading.”)
`15 21 U.S.C § 331(g).
`16 See Fla. Stat. § 499.005(1) (“It is unlawful for a person to perform or cause the performance of
`any of the following acts in this state: (1) The manufacture, repackaging, sale, delivery, or holding
`or offering for sale of any drug, device, or cosmetic that is adulterated or misbranded or has
`otherwise been rendered unfit for human or animal use.”).
`17 21 U.S.C. §331(a); Fla. Stat. § 499.005(1).
`18 21 U.S.C. §331(c); see also Fla. Stat. § 499.005(3)(“It is unlawful for a person to perform or
`cause the performance of any of the following acts in this state: … (3) The receipt of any drug,
`device, or cosmetic that is adulterated or misbranded, and the delivery or proffered delivery of
`such drug, device, or cosmetic, for pay or otherwise.”).
`
`- 9 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 10 of 38
`
`
`
`Head), and TRESemmé” were being recalled “due to potentially elevated levels of benzene.”
`
`Unilever instructed consumers to “stop using the affected aerosol dry shampoo products.”19
`
`31.
`
`As a result of benzene contamination in the Products, they are considered
`
`adulterated and misbranded. Defendant did not disclose that benzene, a known human carcinogen,
`
`is present in the Products purchased by Plaintiffs and the putative class members.
`
`32.
`
`Defendant’s failure to control for benzene contamination and failure to disclose the
`
`risks of benzene in its adulterated Products constitutes unfair and deceptive conduct.
`
`33.
`
`Defendant’s recall of the Products is wholly inadequate where, among other things:
`
`(a) it is limited to products purchased before October 2021, even though products sold after this
`
`date likely continue to be contaminated; (b) it is limited to only specific lots of the Products; (c) to
`
`get compensation under the recall, consumers are required to have proof of purchase, which is
`
`unlikely for disposable products bought at retail stores that are over a year old; (d) although
`
`Defendant states “[a]n internal investigation identified the propellant as the source, and Unilever
`
`has worked with its propellant suppliers to address this issue,”20 this is not useful to consumers
`
`who already used and were exposed to Defendant’s dangerous products.
`
`34.
`
`Unilever knew the risk of its Products being contaminated with benzene at least as
`
`early as July 2021. Around that time, Unilever’s top competitors began recalling aerosol products
`
`due to the presence of benzene and faced litigation based on those recalls. Also, in November
`
`2021, Valisure, an independent laboratory, confirmed the presence of benzene in dozens of aerosol
`
`antiperspirants and sunscreens and submitted a citizens’ petition to the Food and Drug
`
`Administration describing those findings, including that two of Unilever’s Suave antiperspirants
`
`
`19 https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts/unilever-issues-voluntary-
`us-recall-select-dry-shampoos-due-potential-presence-benzene (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`20 https://www.unileverrecall.com/ (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`
`- 10 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 11 of 38
`
`
`
`contained benzene. Unilever ultimately faced numerous lawsuits arising from the Suave
`
`contamination beginning in late 2021.
`
`35.
`
`In December 2021, following the discovery of benzene in certain aerosol spray
`
`sunscreens made by various companies, as well as further investigations into the use of aerosol as
`
`presenting a specific risk, Unilever responded to an inquiry by Forbes magazine: “Unilever said in
`
`an emailed statement it conducted a ‘robust investigation’ of its antiperspirants and deodorants and
`
`is confident in their safety.”21
`
`36.
`
`In March 2022, Unilever announced the decision to recall several Suave deodorant
`
`products due to the presence of benzene, which the company acknowledged is a “human
`
`carcinogen” that “can result in cancers including Leukemia and blood cancer of the bone marrow
`
`and blood disorders which can be life threatening.”22
`
`37.
`
`Unilever attributed the presence of benzene in its Suave deodorant products to the
`
`fact that they were aerosol spray products (like Defendant’s dry shampoo Products), and stated
`
`that Benzene is not an ingredient: “While benzene is not an ingredient in any of the recalled
`
`products, the review showed that unexpected levels of benzene came from the propellant that
`
`sprays the product out of the can.”23
`
`38.
`
`Also, on October 31, 2022, Valisure again petitioned the FDA to address dangerous
`
`levels of benzene in consumer products, this time focusing on dry shampoo products.24 Valisure
`
`
`21 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-29/toxins-in-household-products-leave-
`fda-chasing-a-vapor-trail (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`22 https://www.unileverusa.com/news/press-releases/2022/unilever-issues-voluntary-nationwide-
`recall-of-suave-24hour/ (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`23 Id.
`24 See Valisure Citizen Petition on Benzene in Dry Shampoo Products (“Citizens Petition”) at 1
`(available at https://assets-global.website-
`files.com/6215052733f8bb8fea016220/6360f7f49903987d8f4f4309_Valisure%20FDA%20Citiz
`
`- 11 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 12 of 38
`
`
`
`found that numerous dry shampoo products contain benzene in amounts well over the 2 ppm
`
`threshold permitted for certain drugs.25
`
`39.
`
`In its October 31, 2022 Citizen Petition, Valisure shows data from the analysis of
`
`benzene by directly sampling contaminated air after spraying dry shampoo products, which
`
`suggests potential for short- and long-term inhalation exposure to high levels of benzene.26 The
`
`presence of this known human carcinogen in dry shampoo products that are regularly used indoors
`
`and in large volumes makes this finding especially troubling.27
`
`40.
`
`Given that dry shampoos are cosmetics – not drugs – these results are even more
`
`concerning. Because dry shampoo products contain no active pharmaceutical ingredient for
`
`therapeutic purpose, the presence of benzene at these levels is unacceptable.28
`
`41.
`
`Despite knowing the significant probability that the Products contain benzene,
`
`Unilever represented to Plaintiff and putative class members that its Products are healthy and safe.
`
`In fact, in Unilever’s labeling and product packaging, and in its advertising – including on its
`
`website and online – Unilever promotes and indeed instructs that the Products are not just for
`
`occasional use but also for daily (and regular, repeated) use.29
`
`
`en%20Petition%20on%20Benzene%20in%20Dry%20Shampoo%20Products_103122.pdf) (last
`visited November 1, 2022).
`25 Id. at 2, 13-17.
`26 Id.
`27 Id.
`28 Id.
`29 https://www.suave.com/us/en/products/hair-refresher-dry-shampoo.html (last visited Nov. 9,
`2022).
`
`- 12 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 13 of 38
`
`
`
`42.
`
`On its website, Unilever declares: “Product safety is our top priority. Our home and
`
`personal care products are used every day by millions of people around the world. People trust us
`
`to provide them with products that are safe for them, their families and the environment.”30
`
`43. Moreover, Unilever states on its website:
`
`At a minimum we ensure our products comply with applicable laws. In several
`areas we set our standards higher than those required by law. When this happens [,]
`we also expect our suppliers and partners to meet these standards. Similarly, when
`we take on a new brand or a new company we work to ensure they meet our
`standards as soon as possible.31
`
`44.
`
`Unilever brand Dove touts its robust commitment to consumer health: “We care
`
`about our customers and the environment, so our products are as safe as they are caring. We want
`
`to give our customers the best experience using our products, so our ingredients always comply
`
`with regulations and meet our safety and environmental standards (which often go beyond
`
`regulatory requirements).”32
`
`45.
`
`Unilever specifically represents that its products are safe from benzene, stating on
`
`its website: “we have strict quality controls in place that limit the presence of benzene in our
`
`products so that any traces found fall within safe levels.”33
`
`46.
`
`Defendant advertised and sold the Products without labeling indicating to
`
`consumers that they contain benzene. The following image is illustrative of the labels contained
`
`on the Products purchased by Plaintiffs and putative class members. Plaintiffs note that while the
`
`labeling contains “Warnings,” none of them are for the presence of a carcinogenic ingredient:
`
`
`30 https://www.unilever.com/brands/whats-in-our-products/how-do-we-choose-our-ingredients/
`(last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`31 Id.
`32 https://www.dove.com/us/en/secure/contactus/faq.html (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`33 https://www.unilever.com/brands/whats-in-our-products/your-ingredient-questions-
`answered/controlling-impurities/ (last visited Nov. 9, 2022).
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 14 of 38
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 15 of 38
`
`
`
`
`
`47.
`
`Plaintiffs and putative class members bargained for a dry shampoo free of
`
`contaminants and dangerous substances and were deprived the basis of their bargain when
`
`Defendant sold them a product containing the carcinogen benzene, which rendered the Products
`
`unmerchantable and unfit for use.
`
`48.
`
`Plaintiffs and putative class were injured by the full purchase price of the Products
`
`because the Products are worthless, as they are adulterated and contain the known human
`
`carcinogen, benzene, and are not fit for use by humans. Defendant failed to warn consumers of
`
`this fact. Such illegally sold products are worthless and have no value.
`
`49.
`
`Plaintiffs have standing to represent members of the putative class because there is
`
`sufficient similarity between the specific Products purchased by Plaintiffs and the other Products
`
`not purchased by Plaintiffs. Specifically, each and every one of Defendant’s Products (i) are
`
`marketed in substantially the same way—as dry shampoo— and (ii) fail to include labeling
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 16 of 38
`
`
`
`indicating to consumers that the Products contain the known human carcinogen, benzene, at levels
`
`that are dangerous to human health when used as directed. Accordingly, the misleading effect of
`
`all of the Products’ labels are substantially the same.
`
`50.
`
`Had Plaintiffs and members of the putative class known that any of the Products
`
`were contaminated with benzene, a known human carcinogen, they would not have purchased any
`
`of Defendant’s Products. Thus, Plaintiffs and members of the putative class have “lost money” by
`
`purchasing products
`
`they would not have otherwise purchased but for Defendant’s
`
`misrepresentations and omissions. As a result, Plaintiffs and members of the putative class have
`
`Article III standing.
`
`CLASS ALLEGATIONS
`
`51.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to Rule 23(a), 23(b)(2)-(3) of the Federal Rules
`
`of Civil Procedure on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated as members of the
`
`following class (the “Class”) and subclasses (collectively referred to as the “Subclasses”) defined
`
`as:
`
`Class:
`
`All persons in the United States (including its Territories and the District of
`Columbia) who purchased any Products for personal use or consumption.
`
`California Subclass:
`
`All persons in the state of California who purchased any Products for personal use
`or consumption.
`
`Florida Subclass:
`
`All persons in the state of Florida who purchased any Products for personal use or
`consumption.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 17 of 38
`
`
`
`Illinois Subclass:
`
`All persons in the state of Illinois who purchased any Products for personal use or
`consumption.
`
`Subject to additional information obtained through further investigation and
`
`52.
`
`discovery, the foregoing definition of the Classes may be expanded or narrowed by amendment or
`
`amended complaint. Specifically excluded from the proposed Classes are Defendant, its officers,
`
`directors, agents, trustees, parents, children, corporations, trusts, representatives, employees,
`
`principals, servants, partners, joint venturers, or entities controlled by Defendant, and their heirs,
`
`successors, assigns, or other persons or entities related to or affiliated with Defendant and/or their
`
`officers and/or directors, or any of them; the Judge assigned to this action, and any member of the
`
`Judge’s immediate family.
`
`53.
`
`Certification of Plaintiffs’ claims for Class-wide treatment is appropriate because
`
`Plaintiffs can prove the elements of their claims on a Class-wide basis using the same evidence as
`
`would be used to prove those elements in individual actions alleging the same claim.
`
`54.
`
`Numerosity. Rule 23(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: The members
`
`of the Classes are so numerous and geographically dispersed that individual joinder of all Class
`
`members is impracticable. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that the
`
`proposed Classes contain many tens or hundreds of thousands of members. The precise number of
`
`Class members is unknown to Plaintiffs at this time.
`
`55.
`
`Commonality and Predominance. Rules 23(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules
`
`of Civil Procedure: This action involves common questions of law and fact, which predominate
`
`over any questions affecting individual Class members, including, but not limited to:
`
`a.
`
`Whether Defendant misrepresented and/or failed to disclose material facts
`
`concerning the Products;
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-23706-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2022 Page 18 of 38
`
`
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`Whether Defendant’s conduct was unfair an