-1- 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

NICK PEARSON, On Behalf of Himself and All 

Others Similarly Situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

TARGET CORPORATION, a Minnesota 

Corporation, 

 Defendant. 

Case No. 11cv07972 

Honorable James B. Zagel 

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert 

DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF ITS 

MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Defendant Target Corporation (“Target”) submits this Notice of Supplemental Authority 

in further support of its motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Class Action Complaint 

(“the Complaint” or “Cmplt.”) [D.E. 21] with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 8, 9(b) and 12(b)(6). [D.E. 28-30, 52]. 

On November 1, 2012, the court in Eckler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 3:12-cv-00727 (S.D. 

Cal. Mar. 26, 2012) issued an opinion and order dismissing pursuant to Rules 8 and 12(b)(6) 

Eckler’s claims of consumer fraud and breach of warranty (without prejudice, and with 

prejudice, respectively) related to the purchase of a nutritional supplement containing 

glucosamine and chondroitin. Counsel to the plaintiff in Eckler is also counsel to Plaintiff here, 

and counsel to the defendant in Eckler (Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP) is also co-counsel to 

Defendant here. 

The court in Eckler dismissed the consumer fraud claims on the basis that the plaintiff’s 

reliance on osteoarthritis studies did not state a plausible claim. Slip Opinion at 12:10-16 

Case: 1:11-cv-07972 Document #: 54 Filed: 11/02/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:329
 - 2 - 

(“Ultimately, the Court cannot accept that the studies Eckler cites lend ‘facial plausibility’ to her 

claims that the Equate representations are false or misleading. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. The 

studies allegedly show that glucosamine doesn’t alleviate the symptoms of osteoarthritis in the 

hip and knee. That is a very particular showing with respect to a degenerative joint disease, and 

in the Court’s judgment it doesn’t address the far more general claim—which is made by the 

Equate representations—that glucosamine is good for the body’s joints.”); id. at 15:6-9 (“What 

do studies showing that glucosamine doesn’t alleviate the symptoms of osteoarthritis in the hip 

and knee have to do with the representations of a dietary supplement, explicitly not intended to 

treat a disease, that it is formulated to support joint comfort, rebuil[d] cartilage, and lubricate 

joints?”). That reasoning adopts arguments made by Target in this case in its Opening Brief at 

pages 9-12 [D.E. 30] and in its Reply Brief at pages 1-8 [D.E. 52]. 

A copy of the opinion and order is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

Dated: November 2, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 

Kara L. McCall (ARDC No. 6272681) 

kmccall@sidley.com

Shelby K. Feuerbach (ARDC No. 6296364) 

sfeuerbach@sidley.com

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 

One South Dearborn Street 

Chicago, IL 60603 

Tel: (312) 853-7000 

Fax: (312) 853-7036 

/s/ Bradley J. Andreozzi 

Bradley J. Andreozzi (ARDC No. 6257334) 

bradley.andreozzi@dbr.com

Justin O. Kay (ARDC No. 6286557) 

justin.kay@dbr.com

DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 

191 North Wacker Drive, Suite 3700 

Chicago, IL 60606-1698 

Tel: (312) 569-1000 

Fax: (312) 569-3000 

Counsel for Defendant Target Corporation

Case: 1:11-cv-07972 Document #: 54 Filed: 11/02/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:330