John Paul Mitchell Systems Hit with Class Action Lawsuit Over Hair Care Products Made in USA Claims

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit accuses the maker of Paul Mitchell Tea Tree products of falsely advertising that its hair care items are made in the United States.

Get the latest open class action lawsuits sent to your inbox. Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

According to the 46-page lawsuit, each product manufactured and sold by defendant John Paul Mitchell Systems (JPMS) under its proprietary brands features a prominent claim that it is “Made in the USA.” Although the representation is clearly displayed on the packaging and in online advertising and product descriptions, the items, in fact, contain numerous ingredients and components that are sourced from outside the U.S., the class action suit alleges.

The case takes issue with each hair care product that bears the challenged claim or a synonymous statement—in particular, JPMS’ Tea Tree Lavender Mint Moisturizing Shampoo, Tea Tree Lavender Mint Moisturizing Conditioner, Tea Tree Special Shampoo, Tea Tree Special Invigorating Conditioner, Tea Tree Lemon Sage Thickening Shampoo, Tea Tree Lemon Sage Thickening Conditioner and Tea Tree Grooming Pomade.

As the complaint tells it, these products all contain tea tree oil, a key ingredient not sourced from the U.S.

“Nevertheless, each and every container of [JPMS’] tea tree products claims to be ‘Made in the USA’ without any qualification,” the filing charges.

In addition, many JPMS hair care products, including the Tea Tree Special Shampoo, are made with foreign-sourced jojoba despite being labeled and sold as U.S.-made items, the suit asserts.

Moreover, certain MITCH men’s hair care products contain shea butter and agave, among other ingredients, that are also brought in from outside the U.S., the JPMS lawsuit contends.

The case alleges the cosmetic company has failed to properly disclose the presence of foreign-sourced ingredients in violation of clearly defined federal and state regulations governing the use of “Made in the USA” claims.

“Given its expansive resources and operational sophistication, it is difficult to understand why [JPMS] so clearly violated the well-established laws, rules, and regulations surrounding the use of ‘Made in the USA’ or any derivative thereof, other than to deceive consumers and for its own personal financial gain,” the complaint states.

Per the filing, consumers generally perceive products of U.S. origin to be of higher quality than comparable foreign-made items. As a result of JPMS’ deceptive marketing, consumers have paid a premium price for hair care products they were led to believe were U.S.-made, the filing contends.

The suit argues that had consumers known the JPMS items allegedly contained a significant amount of ingredients sourced from outside the country, they would not have purchased the hair care products.

The lawsuit looks to represent all Illinois or California residents who, within the past four years, purchased one or more of JPMS’ products labeled “Made in the USA” or any derivative thereof on the packaging or product description that were made with or contained ingredients or components not grown or manufactured in the U.S.

Looking for current class action lawsuits to join? Check out ClassAction.org’s class action lawsuit list.