UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 

d/b/a VPX and as BANG ENERGY, a 

Florida Corporation, 

 Plaintiff,

v. 

MONSTER BEVERAGE CORPORATION, 

a Delaware Corporation,

MONSTER ENERGY COMPANY, a 

Delaware Corporation, and RODNEY 

CYRIL SACKS, an individual. 

 

 Defendants.

Case No.: 

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., d/b/a VPX and as Bang Energy (“VPX” or “Plaintiff”) 

sues Defendants, Monster Beverage Corporation (“Monster Beverage Co.”), Monster Energy 

Company (“Monster Energy Co.”) (collectively, “Monster”), and Rodney Cyril Sacks

(“Defendant Sacks”) and alleges: 

INTRODUCTION

1. Monster manufactures and sells so-called “energy” drinks, including, among other 

product SKUs, its flagship ready-to-drink (“RTD”) green “M-Claw” product—a sugar-laden, 

carbonated energy drainer (the “M-Claw”) depicted below:

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 1 of 26
2 

2. VPX brings this action to confront, and seek redress for, Monster’s decades of 

wanton malevolence, including (i) unfairly competing and falsely advertising the nature and 

attributes of its products, (ii) continuing to wreak grievous physical harm upon consumers by 

ignoring reports of that its products are hazardous, even potentially lethal, (iii) abusing judicial 

and arbitral processes as an anticompetitive tactic, and (iv) rank “trademark bullying,” all in 

derogation of free and fair marketplace competition and at the direct behest of its ruthless (co-) 

CEO, Rodney Cyril Sacks, acting alone or in concert with others. 

3. The claims that VPX herein asserts against Monster and Sacks sound in Unfair 

Competition and False Advertising Under 15 U.S.C. § 1125, Violation of the Florida Unfair and 

Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Common Law Unfair Competition.

THE PARTIES

4. Plaintiff VPX is a Florida corporation with its principal place of business at 1600 

N. Park Drive Weston, Florida 33326.

5. Defendant Monster Beverage Co. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place 

of business at 1 Monster Way, Corona, California 92879. 

6. Defendant Monster Energy Co. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place 

of business at 1 Monster Way, Corona, California 92879. Monster Energy Co. is a subsidiary of 

Monster Beverage Co., through which Monster Beverage Co. conducts business. 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 2 of 26
3 

7. Sacks has served as the Chairman of the Board of Monster, Chief Executive Officer, 

and a Director of Monster from November 1990 to present. Sacks is a resident of Laguna Beach, 

California, in Orange County, California. 

8. Defendant Sacks personally oversees all of Monster’s significant corporate 

operations, including product development, quality control, manufacturing, distribution, 

marketing, advertising, media, public relations, and litigation prosecutorial, strategic and tactical

decision-making and approval. Sacks is an integral part of Monster’s day-to-day operations and 

has been for decades. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9. This is an action for unfair competition and false advertising under 15 U.S.C. § 

1125. As such, this Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121 (“[t]he 

district and territorial courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction . . . of all actions 

arising under this chapter”). 

10. Subject matter jurisdiction also is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § § 1331, 1338(a), 

and 1338(b). This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121; the 

doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction, as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1367; and 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), 

because the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest 

and costs, and is between citizens of different states. 

11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants Monster and Sacks pursuant 

to Section 48.193(1)(a), Florida Statutes, because Defendants Monster and Sacks, personally and 

through their agents, among other things: 

a. Operated, conducted, engaged in, or carried on a business or business venture in 

Florida; and, 

b. Committed a tortious act within this state by falsely advertising their signature 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 3 of 26
4 

product – Monster Energy – in this District, and VPX’s claims arise from those 

activities. 

12. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over Defendants Monster and Sacks

pursuant to section 48.193(2), Florida Statutes, because, among other things, Monster and 

Defendant Sacks engaged in substantial and non-isolated activity in Florida. 

13. Based upon the foregoing conduct, the exercise of personal jurisdiction over 

Defendants Monster and Sacks satisfies traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice under 

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

14. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), as a substantial 

part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this District. 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 

15. Established in 1993, VPX is one of the leading manufacturers, distributors, and 

sellers of energy drinks and dietary supplement products. 

16. For more than a decade, VPX’s bestselling products have included Bang® RTD, a 

carbonated, caffeinated, sugarless beverage sold in a “pop-top” can and available in several 

different flavors (the “Bang® RTD””). 

17. Bang® RTD products are a true energy drink product purchased by active-lifestyle 

and fitness-driven consumers. 

18. Unlike other energy drinks on the market (including the M-Claw and other Monster 

product SKUs), the Bang® RTD drink products contain no sugar or other carbohydrates 

19. Among VPX’s competitors are Monster, which promotes its signature product, the 

M-Claw, among other Monster product SKUs, in competition with Bang® RTD products in the 

marketplace.

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 4 of 26
5 

MONSTER & SACKS: CHEATERS AND FALSE ADVERTISERS

20. Monster’s advertisement of M-Claw as an “energy” drink that will “unleash the 

beast” and provide a “big bad buzz”, preys on consumers by causing them to believe that the MClaw offers a mixture of ingredients that, when ingested, result in a sustained increase in energy

and that no subsequent crash will negatively affect their energy and performance. 

21. Although caffeinated, the M-Claw is, in reality, an anti-energy drink that is a sugarloaded, crash-inducing soda pop, the consumption of which provides no sustained energy, provides 

an overall net decrease in energy, and results in a subsequent crash that negatively affects 

consumers’ energy and performance and health. Indeed, according to publicly available adverse 

incident reports, the consumption of M-Claw and related Monster product SKUs have been cited

as a suspected cause of illness and even death on numerous occasions. See Monster related CFSAN 

adverse event reports attached hereto as Exhibit A.

22. In 2002, Monster introduced into the market their signature Monster Energy

product – a carbonated, caffeinated and sugar-loaded RTD beverage sold in a “pop-top” can – 

which Monster label and promote as an “energy” drink:

23. For two decades, Monster has misled consumers about the effects of the M-Claw 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 5 of 26
6 

and its ability to “unleash the beast” and provide energy and vitality to its consumers. According 

to Monster’s website the M-Claw offers “a powerful punch” and “the ideal combo of the right 

ingredients in the right proportion to deliver the big bad buzz that only Monster can.”1

 

24. Monster has promoted the M-Claw through a campaign of advertisements and 

affiliations with extreme action sports, such as motocross, skiing and snowboarding, 

skateboarding, mixed martial arts, Formula 1, and other endeavors typically associated with 

athleticism, speed, rage, and of course, energy. 

25. Indeed, Monster’s advertisements are designed to target consumers interested in 

these forms of sport and entertainment, implying to their prospective consumers, both directly and 

indirectly, that drinking the M-Claw will enhance their performance abilities and “unleash the 

beast” within them.

2

26. Such advertisements even portray that drinking the M-Claw will unlock a source of 

performance, ability, and power that would otherwise be unavailable to them. 

1 See Monster Energy, https://www.monsterenergy.com/us/en/products/monster-energy (last 

accessed Aug. 24, 2022) (emphasis added).

2 See The Brandgym, Monster “Unleash the Beast” to Challenge Red Bull – Brilliant Brand Ideas 

1, https://thebrandgym.com/monster-unleashing-the-beast-to-challenge-red-bull/ (last accessed 

Aug. 30, 2022). 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 6 of 26
7

27. According to Monster the M-Claw is the “the meanest energy drink on the planet,”

providing consumers with the key to accessing the energy of a “beast.” 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 7 of 26
8 

28. Despite its name, imaging, associations, tag lines, and motto, however, the M-Claw

does not provide consumers with the energy it claims to offer. In fact, it does the exact opposite.

29. The M-Claw actually decreases consumers’ overall energy, rather than increase it.

Instead of a big bad buzz, all consumers are left with is a big bad crash. 

30. A single can of the M-Claw contains a whopping 58 grams of carbohydrates, of 

which 54 grams are made up of “added sugars.” Ingredients listed within the M-Claw label include 

“sugar,” “glucose,” and “maltodextrin.”3

3

 Additionally, as if the 58 grams of added sugar were not already enough, according to its 

Nutrition Facts, each can of Monster Energy also contains unknown amounts of sucralose to make 

the drink all the “sweeter” to its consumers. See https://www.healthdigest.com/597244/aremonster-energy-drinks-bad-for-you. (last accessed Aug. 30, 2022). 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 8 of 26
9 

See Walmart, Monster Energy Drink, Original, 16 fl oz, 

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Monster-Energy-Green-Original-Energy-Drink-16-fl-oz/12018560

(last accessed Aug. 30, 2022). 

31. As recent studies have demonstrated, the M-Claw does not have an impact on 

athletic benchmarks, such as increasing ride time-to-exhaustion or an improvement of treadmill 

exercise performance.4

 Indeed, the M-Claw’s high sugar and carbohydrate content actually causes 

consumers to experience a sugar crash, resulting in higher levels of fatigue following consumption. 

4

 See Gabriel J Sanders, Willard Peveler, Brady Holmer and Corey A Peacock, The effect of 

three different energy drinks on oxygen consumption and perceived exertion during treadmill 

exercise, Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (Sept. 21, 2015), 

https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1550-2783-12-S1-P1 (last accessed Aug. 30, 

2022).

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 9 of 26
10

That is, it decreases – not increases – one’s overall net energy.5

32. Such deceptive conduct and practices in Monster’s advertisements on the part of 

Defendants is not mere “puffery,” but is instead deceptive, fraudulent, and actionable.

33. At all relevant times, Monster has made, and continue to make, false, misleading, 

and disingenuous representations regarding the M-Claw and other Monster product SKUs– both 

on the face of the product itself, as well as through other forms of marketing and advertisements. 

34. Specifically, the M-Claw was, and continues to be, advertised and marketed as “the 

meanest energy drink on the planet,” when it, in fact, fails to provide a sustained energy increase, 

leads to a substantial crash in energy, and actually decreases a consumer’s overall net energy: 

See M-Claw Product Description, Monster Energy - The Original Green Monster Energy, 

https://www.monsterenergy.com/us/en/products/monster-energy/monster-energy (last accessed 

Aug. 30, 2022).

“Unleash the Beast”, But Not Really

5 See Konstantinos, et al., Sugar rush or sugar crash? A meta-analysis of carbohydrate 

effects on mood, Neuroscience &b Biobehavioral Reviews, Volume 101, Pages 46-67 (June 2019), 

(last accessed Aug. 24, 2022) (discovered lower levels of alertness and higher levels of fatigue 

after the first hour of consumption of so-called “energy” drinks including Monster Energy).

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 10 of 26
11 

35. Monster has strategically utilized media, athletes and celebrities to ensure their 

false, deceptive, and misleading marketing reaches a broad consumer base. 

36. Associating their catch phrase “unleash the beast” with some of the greatest athletes 

and entertainers in the world, Monster has effectively deceived consumers into believing the MClaw will elevate them to achieve “beast mode” with a “big bad buzz.” 

37. Examples of such false, misleading, and disingenuous representations and 

advertisements include: 

a. Portraying athletes such as Kamaru Usman, a professional mixed martial artist, 

stating he is “Monster Made.”6

;

b. Advertising a new collaboration between Monster and rapper/actor Ice Cube to 

“bring a whole new ENERGY” to the NBA’s “BIG3”7; and, 

c. Associating the heavy consumption of M-Claw and other Monster products with 

action sports and the “beast mode” vibe.8

6

 See

https://twitter.com/MonsterEnergy/status/1454840595952726017?s=20&t=vT7S0QdKbKFQl1J1

neDH6Q (last accessed Aug. 24, 2022) 

7

 See https://www.facebook.com/MonsterEnergy/photos/10159401501540827(last 

accessed Aug. 24, 2022). 

8

 See https://twitter.com/MonsterEnergy/status/1466542795540209667/photo/1(last 

accessed Aug. 24, 2022) 

 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 11 of 26
12 

38. In fact, Monster goes so far as to declare that the M-Claw has extreme lifestyle 

benefits, claiming it is not just an energy drink, but a creation to back the next generation of future 

musicians and athletes. See About Us Page Screenshot attached hereto as Exhibit B. 

39. In truth, however, the M-Claw fails to even deliver the most basic benefit that 

Monster’s claim to offer their consumers – sustained energy and overall net increase in energy – 

much less “unleash” any sort of “beast” or provide any kind of “big bad buzz”. 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 12 of 26
13 

Big Bad Buzz Or Big Bad Crash? 

40. Indeed, recent studies have established that the M-Claw has a negative effect on 

consumers’ energy levels.9

 

41. That is, although purporting to be an “energy” drink that can provide its consumers 

with a “morning hitter,” “mid-day pick me-up,” or “afternoon warrior,”10 the M-Claw actually 

does no such thing. Id. 

42. Instead, various studies have demonstrated that the M-Claw leaves its consumers 

experiencing a big bad sugar-crash, as well as other serious adverse health consequences as a result 

of the excess sugars and carbohydrates the product contains. Id.

43. Monster undoubtedly was, and continues to be, aware of these facts as is evidenced 

by Monster’s past deliberate efforts to downplay the density of Monster Energy’s per can sugar 

content by formerly breaking down its Nutrition Facts panel into two separate serving sizes, despite 

9

 See Konstantinos, et al., supra note 3; see also Fletcher E., et al., Randomized Controlled 

Trial of High-Volume Energy Drink Versus Caffeine Consumption on ECG and Hemodynamic 

Parameters, J Am Heart Assoc. (Aug. 24, 2022). 

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/JAHA.116.004448 (last visited Aug. 24, 2022).

10 See https://twitter.com/MonsterEnergy/status/1427291630164344836 (last accessed Aug. 

30, 2022). 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 13 of 26
14

the fact that it is a carbonated “pop-top” beverage product:

Given that carbonated pop-top beverage products were inherently limited to one serving per can 

at the time Monster introduced the bifurcated Nutrition Facts panel, it is apparent that Monster 

configured the Nutrition Facts panel as such in a deliberate attempt to boost the sales of M-Claw. 

44. In addition to the false and deceptive representations on the product packaging 

itself, Monster also use social media to underscore their message that the M-Claw gives you a “big 

bad buzz” and will “unleash the beast” – all resulting in the false and deceptive message that the 

M-Claw, and other Monster Energy products, provide a sustained increase in energy, no 

subsequent crash, and an increase in one’s overall net energy. 

45. Monster’s false and deceptive representations in its advertisements deliberately 

attack other energy drink competitors, including even VPX despite its clean safety records. 

Monster advertises its M-Claw as, “the meanest energy drink on the planet. It is the ideal 

combination of the right ingredients in the right proportion to deliver the big bad buzz that only 

Monster can. Monster packs a powerful punch but has a smooth easy drinking flavor.” See About 

Us Page Screenshot attached hereto as Exhibit B.

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 14 of 26
15 

46. However, such acts come at the expense and detriment of past, present, and future 

consumers, as well as the energy drink industry alike, including but not limited to VPX, since 

Monster’s advertisements as evidenced by Exhibit B dishonestly falsely and duplicitously suggest 

that Monster products are superior to its energy drink competitors. 

47. Monster should not be permitted to perpetuate false information about the M-Claw 

and other Monster product SKUs. VPX brings this action to prevent Monster from continuing to 

do so and requests Monster’s adverse conduct to immediately cease.

MONSTER & SACKS: RECKLESS PEDDLERS OF HEALTH HAZARDOUS PRODUCTS

48. Furthermore, Monster products’ outlandish levels of sugar have been found to lead 

to severe health consequences, including but not limited to, serious effects on a consumers’ 

cardiovascular system.11

49. New discoveries continue to show the negative health effects of the “consumption 

of sugar-laden energy drinks,” such as the M-Claw and other Monster product SKUs, including an 

increased risk for kidney disease and failure.12

50. In fact, since 2004, suspected links between consumption of Monster’s products 

and no less than 20 deaths, 10 heart attacks, and over 120 adverse health events have been reported 

to the F.D.A.13 See Exhibit C list of all Monster adverse health events.

11 See e.g., AHA recommendations: Drinking a lot of liquid sugar may lead to insulin resistance, 

metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, and fatty liver disease. https://www.webmd.com/diet/whatto-know-liquid-sugar (last accessed Aug. 25, 2022) 12 See Energy Drink Lawsuit, https://www.schmidtandclark.com/energy-drink-lawsuit (last 

accessed Aug. 24, 2022) (“A new study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health 

has identified yet another link between the consumption of sugar-laden energy drinks and a risk 

for kidney disease and heart attack emergency room visits.”). 

13 See https://www.fda.gov/Food/ComplianceEnforcement/ucm494015.htm (last accessed 

Aug. 24, 2022) (identifying consumer reports of suspected links between consumption of Monster 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 15 of 26
16 

51. Monster, of course, has knowledge of such information, but obscures and muffles 

it with false and deceptive advertising practices and baseless misrepresentations that their products 

are safe. 

52. Despite being aware of such adverse, even potentially lethal health risks, Monster 

nonetheless continues to disseminate and tout false information about its products at the expense 

of their consumers’ energy and health, as well as the energy drink industry as a whole – including 

VPX.

53. During the 2012 F.D.A. investigation of adverse health reports associated with 

Monster Energy Products (including five deaths in 2012)14, Sacks continuously defended Monster 

and falsely assured the public, “Once again, and first and foremost, we reiterate that Monster’s

products are safe,” 15 knowing, in fact, that Monster’s products had caused five deaths and would 

products and adverse health evenings including fatigue, high blood pressure, irregular cardio 

responses including cardiac arrest, and even multiple deaths). See also, Exhibit C.

Examples of such complaints include: 

• June 14, 2006 – 19 year old male hospitalized with vomiting, rhabdomyolysis, 

myoclonus, dyspnea, and chest pain. 

• December 8, 2011 – 25 year old male hospitalized with irregular heart rate, atrial 

fibrillation, and dyspnea. 

• January 3, 2012 – 45 year old male dies following Monster Energy consumption. 

• April 9, 2012 – 14 year old girl dies of cardiac arrest following Monster Energy 

consumption. 

• April 26, 2018 – 30 year old male dies of cardiac arrest following Monster Energy 

consumption. 

14 In 2012 senators Dick Durbin of Illinois and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, as well as 

House of Representatives member Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, had requested the Food 

and Drug Administration investigate the safety and advertising of energy drinks such as Monster. 

Ultimately, the F.D.A. reports did not represent any conclusion about whether the products caused 

the adverse events.

15 Monster Beverage C.E.O. defends Energy Drinks’ safety. See 

https://www.foodbusinessnews.net/articles/772-monster-beverage-c-e-o-defends-energy-drinkssafety#:~:text=house%2C%E2%80%9D%20Mr.,Sacks%20said.,are%20safe%2C%E2%80%9D

%20he%20said (last accessed Aug. 30.2022)

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 16 of 26
17 

continue to cause deaths. Although fatalities had already occurred, Sacks diverted the public’s 

attention to the numbers, “Tens of billions of energy drinks have been consumed safely over the 

past 25 years, including 8 billion Monster Energy drinks since 2002.”16

54. Sacks himself perpetuated Monster’s deceit by publicly announcing the safety of 

Monster’s products without bona fide evidentiary support in the face of F.D.A scrutiny. See Sacks 

announcing publicly at shareholder’s meeting, picked up by press, that Monster products are safe 

despite F.D.A 2012 investigation into five suspected Monster-caused deaths. 17

55. After the 2012 F.D.A investigation, Monster and Sacks informed the public that 

Monster would not alter the company recipe despite the five reported deaths caused by Monster’s 

products. 

56. On July 31, 2013, Sacks testified before the Senate assuring the public and senate 

that, “Monster is, and has always been, committed to ensuring that all of the ingredients in its 

energy drinks (including caffeine) are safe and in regulatory compliance for their intended use.”18

57. Monster has used these misleading advertisements to obscure their products 

extreme health threats and fatalities from the public at large. The FDA website contains a publicly 

available list of Monster related fatalities and adverse health effects. To date, there have been at 

least nineteen reported deaths, ten heart attacks, and approximately one hundred AERs. 19 See

16 Id.

17 See https://www.ocregister.com/2013/06/18/creating-a-monster-building-a-lifestyle-in-a-canbrand/ (last accessed Aug. 31, 2022) 

18 See July 31, 2013 written testimony of Rodney Sacks before U.S. Senate. 

https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/3D8EB9DB-8489-49DE-BDAD293A3A9174F3 (last accessed Aug. 31, 2022) 

19 See https://www.fda.gov/Food/ComplianceEnforcement/ucm494015.htm (last accessed Aug. 

24, 2022) (identifying complaints submitted by consumers relating to use of M-Claw, including 

fatigue, high blood pressure, irregular cardio responses including cardiac arrest, and even death – 

with approximately 19 reported deaths since October 26, 2007).

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 17 of 26
18 

Monster suspected links to fatalities attached hereto as Exhibit C. See also Exhibit A.

58. The first reported suspected link between consumption of Monster’s products and

death occurred on or around October 26, 2007. Between October 26, 2007, through July 1, 2012,

five additional deaths suspected of being linked to consumption of Monsters’ products were 

reported. Despite the fatalities, Monster continues to advertise their products without warning 

consumers of the negative health effects. See Exhibit A and C.

59. On or around 2012, the F.D.A investigated Monster as a result of the five reported 

deaths. Despite the investigation, Monster and Sacks failed to reformulate their products and 

continued to employ the same deceptive advertising techniques without warning to the public. As 

a result, between 2012 until present, 15 additional Monster related fatalities have occurred. See

Exhibit A and C. 

60. As a result of Monster’s and Sack’s continued false, misleading, and disingenuous 

representations relating to the M-Claw and other Monster product SKUs, VPX and other 

competitive energy drink companies have sustained, and will continue to sustain damages.

61. In addition, unless halted by this Court, Monster and Sacks will continue making

false and misleading representations and will continue to induce reasonable consumers into 

making misinformed purchasing decisions, not only resulting in an unwelcome, unanticipated 

crash and overall decrease in energy, but potentially exposing consumers to adverse and fatal

health consequences. 

MONSTER & SACKS: VEXATIOUS ABUSERS OF JUDICIAL AND ARBITRAL PROCESSES

62. Litigants in more than 1600 cases, Monster and Sacks are vexatious abusers of 

judicial and arbitral processes, using litigations, and its ample resources to fund them, to bully 

others, including competitors against whom Monster and Sacks misuse lawsuits as a means of 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 18 of 26
19 

trying to destroy free and fair marketplace competition. 

63. In a stark example, Monster actually had an arbitration award against a distributor 

overturned by a federal appellate court because the presiding arbitrator had an undisclosed 

ownership interest in the underlying arbitration organization of which Monster was a highly 

litigious repeat customer, thus evidencing bias in favor of Monster.20

64. Monster actually had an arbitration award against a distributor overturned by a 

federal appellate court because the presiding arbitrator had an undisclosed ownership interest in 

the underlying arbitration organization of which Monster was a highly litigious repeat customer, 

thus evidencing bias in favor of Monster.

MONSTER & SACKS: TRADEMARK BULLIES

65. Monster also has been identified as the number one “All Time Biggest [Trademark] 

Bull[y]” by Trademarkia, which publicly lists a legion of trademark proceedings in which Monster 

picked on small companies and individuals, many of whom were not even in the beverage business.

21

66. All conditions precedent to the filing of this action have been satisfied, waived, or 

would be futile to perform. 

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF SECTION 43 OF THE LANHAM ACT, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) 

(against Monster and Sacks)

67. VPX re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 66 as if 

fully set forth herein. 

20 See Monster Energy Company vs. City Beverages, LLC, 940 F.3d 1130 (9th Cir. 2019)

21 https://www.trademarkia.com/opposition/bully-monster-energycompany?fn=Monster%20Energy%20Company [trademarkia.com]

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 19 of 26
20

68. Monster has made and distributed, in interstate commerce and in this District, 

advertisements that contain false or misleading statements of fact regarding their signature MClaw product and other Monster product SKUs. Such advertisements contain actual misstatements 

and/or misleading statements, including among others, the statements that Monster’s product can 

provide consumers with a “big bad buzz” and “unleash” their inner “beast”, resulting in a sustained 

increase in energy, overall net increase in energy, and no subsequent crash. 

69. Defendant Sacks has participated, ratified, and/or directed the campaign of 

Monster’s false advertisements, including, but not limited to, falsely, dishonestly and 

mendaciously proclaiming the safety of Monster’s products.

70. Monster and Defendant Sacks have made, controlled, or ratified false or misleading 

statements of fact in commercial advertising or promotion, and misrepresented the nature, 

characteristics, and qualities of their M-Claw product and other Monster product SKUs.

71. These false statements actually deceive or confuse, or have a tendency to deceive

or confuse, consumers as well as potential consumers. This deception/confusion is similarly

material in that it is likely to influence the purchasing decisions of VPX’s consumers and potential 

consumers. 

72. Monster’s and Sacks’ false and misleading advertising statements and omissions 

injure both consumers and VPX. 

73. As such, Monster and Sack’s false and misleading advertising violate the Lanham 

Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). 

74. Because Monster and Sacks’ have caused, and will continue to cause, irreparable 

injury to VPX for which there is no adequate remedy at law, VPX is entitled to injunctive relief 

under 15 U.S.C. § 1116, including but not limited to, an order restraining Monster and Rodney 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 20 of 26
21 

Sacks, their agents, employees, representatives, or anyone acting on their behalf, from engaging 

in further acts of false advertising, and ordering Monster to remove all false advertisements 

immediately. 

75. Additionally, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117, VPX is entitled to recover from 

Monster and Rodney Sacks for the damages sustained by VPX as a result of Monster’s and Sacks’

acts in violation of the Lanham Act. 

76. VPX is also entitled to recover the gains, profits, and advantages that Monster and 

Sacks have obtained through their acts, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117. 

77. Finally, VPX is entitled to recover for the costs of this action, as well as attorney's 

fees in this exceptional case. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff VPX requests judgment against Monster and Sacks, jointly and 

severally, for actual damages (including, but not necessarily limited to, lost profits), disgorgement 

of profits, a declaratory judgment that Monster’s and Sacks’ actions violate Section 43 of the 

Lanham Act, entry of a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting all such further conduct, 

interest as allowed by law, attorney’s fees, costs, as well as any other relief this Court deems just 

and proper. 

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF FLORIDA DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT, 

CHAPTER 501, PART II, FLORIDA STATUTES

(against Monster) 

78. VPX re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 66 as if 

fully set forth herein. 

79. Florida Statutes Section 501.204(1) provides that “unfair or deceptive acts or 

practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful.” The provisions 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 21 of 26
22

of the Act shall be “construed liberally to promote” the protection of the “consuming public and 

legitimate business enterprises from those who engage in unfair methods of competition, or 

unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.” §

501.204, Fla. Stat. 

80. Monster was, and is, at all material times to the allegations herein, engaged in “trade 

and commerce” as defined by the Act. § 501.203, Fla. Stat. Specifically, Monster markets, 

advertises, and sell their products, including but not limited to, its signature M-Claw product and 

other Monster product SKUs. 

81. Specifically, since 2002, Monster had made and continues to make false and 

misleading representations of fact regarding the nature, characteristics, effects, and quality of their 

signature product, M-Claw and other Monster product SKUs by: 

a. Falsely and deceptively asserting that the product will provide you with a “big bad 

buzz” and “unleash the beast” when, in fact, it provides no sustained increase in 

energy and instead actually decreases one’s overall net energy and results in a 

substantial crash; 

b. Falsely and deceptively labeling the product as an “Energy Drink” when, in fact, it 

provides no sustained increase in energy and instead actually decreases one’s 

overall net energy and results in a substantial crash;

c. Falsely and deceptively associating the product with pro athletes and athletic events 

on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, which also 

suggests an increase in overall net energy and performance;

d. Falsely and deceptively labeling the product as the “ideal combo of the right 

ingredients in the right proportion to deliver the “big bad buzz that only Monster 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 22 of 26
23 

can;” and, 

e. Failing to warn consumers of health effects caused by consumption of the product. 

82. Monster has made such false and deceptive statements through marketing and 

promotional materials on the face of the product, social media platforms, Monster’s website, and 

other publications. 

83. Monster has been willfully obstructive to other beverage competitors and deceived 

the public’s perception of same by continuing to fulfill its reputation as the “All Time Biggest 

[Trademark] Bull[y]” by Trademarkia, which publicly lists a legion of trademark proceedings in 

which Monster picked on small companies and individuals. 

84. Monster’s conduct is, and was misleading, immoral, unethical, oppressive, 

unconscionable, and unscrupulous, and has mislead and deceived consumers acting reasonably 

under the circumstances, to the consumers’ and Bang’s detriment. 

85. Monster knew the conduct described herein was misleading and deceptive when 

they made the false and deceptive statements. 

86. As a result of Monster’s actions, Plaintiff has been damaged. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff VPX requests judgment against Monster for actual damages

(including, but not necessarily limited to, lost profits), a declaratory judgment that Monster’s

actions violate the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, entry of a preliminary and 

permanent injunction prohibiting all such further conduct, interest as allowed by law, attorney’s 

fees, costs, as well as any other relief this Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT III

COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION 

(against Monster and Sacks) 

87. VPX re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 66 as if 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 23 of 26
24

fully set forth herein. 

88. Monster has made, published, disseminated, and circulated false, deceptive, 

misleading statements, representations, and advertisements misrepresenting the nature, quality, 

effects, and characteristics of their signature product, the M-Claw and other Monster product 

SKUs, with the intent to sell, distribute, and increase the consumption of, and interest in, the MClaw product and other Monster product SKUs.

89. Defendant Sacks has participated, ratified, and/or directed the campaign of 

Monster’s false advertisements, including, but not limited to, falsely, dishonestly and 

mendaciously proclaiming the safety of Monster’s products.

90. Monster’s and Sack’s conduct as described herein, constitutes unlawful, unfair, 

and/or deceptive practices. 

91. Specifically, the advertising associated with the M-Claw and other Monster product 

SKUs, misleads consumers into believing that the product will “unleash the beast” and provide a 

“big bad buzz” within them, resulting in a sustained energy increase and an overall increase in net 

energy with no subsequent crash, when it in fact, it does not. 

92. Monster has been willfully obstructive to other beverage competitors and deceived 

the public’s perception of same by continuing to fulfill its reputation as the “All Time Biggest 

[Trademark] Bull[y]” by Trademarkia, which publicly lists a legion of trademark proceedings in 

which Monster picked on small companies and individuals. 

93. As a direct and proximate result of Monster’s and Sack’s improper conduct, VPX 

has suffered losses which include damage to VPX’s goodwill with its current, former, and future 

consumers. Furthermore, Monster’s and Sack’s improper conduct has also caused direct damage 

to its consumers. 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 24 of 26
25 

94. Such acts by Monster and Sacks have caused, and will continue to cause, VPX 

damages, including but not limited to, dilution of goodwill, loss of consumers, confusion to current 

and future consumers, and diminution of value to VPX’s products. The damage such acts will 

cause to VPX are both imminent and irreparable, and the amount of damage sustained by VPX 

will be difficult to ascertain if such acts continue. 

95. As a result of the improper acts of Monster and Sacks, VPX is entitled to punitive 

damages, as well as an injunction restraining Monster and their agents, employees, representatives, 

or anyone acting on their behalf from engaging in further unlawful conduct. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff VPX requests judgment against Monster and Sacks, jointly and 

severally, for actual damages (including, but not necessarily limited to, lost profits), disgorgement 

of profits, entry of a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting all such further conduct, 

interest as allowed by law, as well as any other relief this Court deems just and proper. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, VPX hereby demands a trial 

by jury on all issues and claims so triable. 

/s/ Gregg H. Metzger

Gregg H. Metzger, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 836850 

Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

 1600 North Park Drive 

Weston, Florida 33326 

Telephone: (786) 417-0104 

Email: Gregg.Metzger@bangenergy.com

 

 

 /s/ Alexander Angueira 

 Alexander Angueira, Esq. 

 Florida Bar No. 0716091 

Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

1600 North Park Drive 

Weston, Florida 33326 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 25 of 26
26 

Telephone: (305) 915.0475 

Email: Alexander.angueira@bangenergy.com

/s/ Aileen M. Carpenter 

Aileen M. Carpenter, Esq.

FBN: 1035905 

Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

1600 North Park Drive

Weston, Florida 33326 

Phone: 954-579-7291 

Facsimile: 954-389-6254 

Email: Aileen.Carpenter@bangenergy.com

[This portion was intentionally left blank.] 

Case 0:22-cv-61621-RKA Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2022 Page 26 of 26