Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Perkins v. Philips Oral Health Care, Inc. et al
Case Number:
3:12-cv-01414
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
Sectors & Industries:
-
October 16, 2013
Philips AirFloss Buyers Shafted In False Ad Deal, Group Says
Advertising watchdog Truth in Advertising Inc. urged a California federal judge Tuesday to reject a settlement that provides consumers with vouchers, instead of actual cash, in a class action accusing Philips Oral Health Care Inc. of deceptively marketing its Sonicare AirFloss plaque removal product.
-
July 12, 2013
Philips Doles Out Vouchers To Settle AirFloss Suit
A California federal judge on Thursday gave preliminary approval to a deal requiring Philips Oral Healthcare Inc. to issue refunds to as many as 50,000 consumers to settle a class action accusing the company of misleading consumers about its Sonicare AirFloss plaque removal product.
-
December 11, 2012
Philips Can't Escape Consumer Class Action Over AirFloss
A California federal judge on Friday pared a class action accusing Philips Oral Healthcare Inc. of misleading consumers about its Sonicare AirFloss plaque removal product, saying plaintiffs couldn't raise breach of contract claims because they failed to adequately prove Philips violated its warranties but leaving unfair competition claims intact.