The company says that its product will boost testosterone levels by 10,000%. The plaintiffs says the product is snake oil marked up to $70 a package. So begins a class-action lawsuit filed in California superior court May 6. The suit says that Musclemeds makes false advertising claims about Arimatest and that the product creates a false result when tested.

Scott J. Ferrell of Call Jensen & Ferrell of Newport Beach, Calif., represents two California men plus others who would qualify for class-action status. The suit seeks “to recover millions of dollars generated by defendants via the false and misleading claims.”

Musclemeds claims that Arimatest boosts testosterone much more than competitors’ products, according to the lawsuit. The product inhibits estrogen and elevates action via AI-1 and AI-2 aromatose-inhibiting ingredients.

The plaintiffs claim that the product “does not boost actual, bonded testosterone by 10,000% or anything like that.” The suit further says that Musclemeds claims in advertisements and product labels to have a patent pending for its Fastorb Technology are false because no such application exists.

Arimatest is a synthetic testosterone supplement that is promoted as improving the user’s physical fitness by preventing its conversion to estrogen, according to the suit. The results should be an increase in muscle mass, increased strength or improved stamina. The main ingredient is ATD, which the suit says shows higher testosterone levels when tested through radioimmunoassay methods.

The advertised claim of higher levels is false and the defendants know it, the suit says. ZRT Laboratories, which is cited as the source of research supporting the 10,000% claim, has twice demanded that Musclemeds stop using the lab’s name in its advertising.

In a declaration filed in U.S. District Court on May 4,ZRT marketing director Steve Forsyth wrote, “ZRT did not conduct any research according to scientific methods that would support the research findings being attributed to ZRT by the manufacturer of Arimatest.” Forsyth also said that, in January, he “also had serious doubts about the accuracy of the scientific assertions and representations contained in Arimatest advertising.”

The suit seeks damages based on violation of the California Legal Remedies Act, unjust enrichment, fraud, violation of the California business and protections code, and breach of warranty.

About Joel Rothman

Joel B. Rothman represents clients in intellectual property infringement litigation involving patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, defamation, trade libel, unfair competition, unfair and deceptive trade practices, and commercial matters. Joel’s litigation practice also includes significant focus on electronic discovery issues such as e-discovery management and motion practice relating to e-discovery.