PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

UNITED ST ATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the Matter of 

California Naturel, Inc., 

a corporation, 

Respondent. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 9370 

584010 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY DECISION 

Pursuant to Commission Rule 3.24(a), 16 C.F.R. § 3.24(a), Complaint Counsel moves for 

Summary Decision and the entry of an Order against Respondent California Naturel, Inc. 

("California Naturel"). As detailed in the Complaint Counsel's Statement of Material Facts Not 

in Dispute ("Material Facts"), scrcenshots of Respondent California Nature}, Inc!s website 

establish that it expressly claimed that its Sunscreen SPF 30 was "all natural. " Wholly 

contradicting these claims, California Nature! admitted in a submission to the Commission on 

May 6, 2016, that its Sunscreen SPF 30 formula contains 8% Dimethicone, a synthetic 

ingredient. Material Facts, ii~ 11-12. Therefore, there are no material issues of fact to resolve at 

trial. Accordingly, Summary Decision is appropriate. We further request that the Commission 

issue the Notice Order against California Nature!. 

I. Summary Decision Standard 

Commission Rule 3.24(a)(2) provides that a Summary Decision "shall be rendered ... if 

the pleadings ... , admissions on file, and affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any 

material fact and that the moving party is entitled to such decision as a matter oflaw." 16 C.F.R. 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

§ 3.24(a)(2). 1 Since these provisions are virtually identical to the provisions governing summary 

judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Commission applies its 

summary decision rule consistent with case law construing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Kroger Co., 98 

F.T.C. 639, 726 (1981); Hearst Corp., 80 F.T.C. 1011, 1014 (1972). 

The party moving for summary decision thus bears the initial burden of identifying 

evidence demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. 

Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986); LabMD, Inc., WL 2331027 at *3 (FTC May 19, 2014); 

Telebrands Corp., 2004 WL 1720011 at *2 (FTC Apr. 13, 2004). Once the moving party meets 

this burden, the nonmoving party must establish specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial. 

Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986); NC. State Bd. of 

Dental Examiners, 151 F.T.C. 607, 611 (2011). The nonmoving party may not rest on mere 

allegations or denials of its pleading but must "come forward with 'specific facts showing that 

there is a genuine issue for trial."' Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 587; Telebrands Corp., 2004 WL 

1720011 at *2 (FTC Apr. 4, 2004). See also 16 C.F.R. § 3.24(a)(3) ("a party opposing the 

motion may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading; his response, by 

affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is 

a genuine issue of fact for trial."). 

II. Argument 

A. Deception Standard 

The Commission determines ifthe overall "net impression" of a respondent's claims are 

deceptive by conducting a three-part inquiry: (1) what claims are conveyed in the advertisement; 

1 Commission Rule of Practice 3.24(a)(l) permits Complaint Counsel to move for Summary 

Decision "at any time after 20 days following the issuance of the complaint." 16 C.F.R. § 

3.24(a)(l). Because the Complaint issued on April 12, 2016, Material Facts, if 1, this motion is 

timely. 

2 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

(2) are those claims false or misleading; and (3) are those claims material to prospective 

consumers. POM Wonderful, LLC v. FTC, 777 F.3d 478, 490 (D.C. Cir. 2015), cert. denied _ 

U.S._, 136 S. Ct. 1839 (2016); Kraft, Inc. v. FTC, 970 F.2d 311, 314 (7th Cir. 1992); FTC 

Policy Statement on Deception ("Deception Statement''), appended to Cliff dale Assocs., Inc., 103 

F.T.C. 110, 1984 WL 565319 at *45 (FTC Mar. 23, 1984). This "net impression" is based on an 

evaluation of both express and implied claims. Kraft, 114 F.T.C. 40, 122 (1991). 

B. California Nature/ Expressly Claimed that its Sunscreen was ''All Natural" 

Screen captures of individual webpages from California N aturel' s website claim that its 

Sunscreen is a "soft, luxurious and non-oily all natural sunscreen." Material Facts~ 8 (emphasis 

added). Additionally, Respondent prints the phrase "All Natural" on the tube of California 

Naturel's Sunscreen SPF 30 pictured on this webpage. Id. at ii 9. Furthermore, Respondent's 

"Our Ingredients" webpage expressly represents that "California Nature! uses only the purest, 

most luxurious and effective ingredients found in nature. (emphasis added)" Id. at ii 10. 

C. California Naturel's "All Natural" Claim was False 

On May 6, 2016, Respondent California Naturel's president, John Bernard Duler, on 

behalf of the Respondent, lodged a response to the Complaint with the Commission's Secretary 

("May 6 Response '). Material Facts, ii 2. The May 6 Response admits that: (1) California 

Naturel's Sunscreen SPF 30 formula contains 8 percent Dimethicone, and (2) Dimethicone is a 

synthetic material. Material Fascts, ~ii 11-12. These two admissions establish that California 

Naturel's express representations that its Sunscreen SPF 30 was "all natural" were false. 

There is some ambiguity regarding whether California Naturel's May 6 Response 

constitutes its Answer to the Commission's Complaint or simply is a written statement submitted 

3 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

to the Commission.2 For the purposes of Summary Decision, however, this is a distinction 

without a difference. The May 6 Response included two critical admissions against California 

Naturel's interest concerning Sunscreen SPF 30's ingredients, and statements against the interest 

of a party are admissible. Surprise Brassiere Co., Inc., 71 F.T.C. 868, 1967 WL 93954 at * 53 

(F.T.C. Jun. 15, 1967). 

The Federal Rules of Evidence, in Rule F.R.E. 801(d)(2), create a five-part test to 

determine the admissibility of a party's admission against interest. First, there has to be a 

"statement" by the party which, per FRE 801(a), includes written assertions, FRE 801(d)(2). 

Second, the statement must be made by the party or by an individual representing the party. Id 

at 80l(d)(2)(A). Third, the party must manifest that it either is adopting the statement or believes 

it to be true. Id at 801(d)(2)(B). Fourth, the statement must be made by a person authorized by 

the party to make a statement on the subject. Id. at 801(d)(2)(C). Fifth, the statement must have 

been made by the party's agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship 

while that relationship existed. Id. at 801(d)(2)(D). 

The May 6 Response easily meets this test. First, California Naturel's president signed 

and submitted the statement to the Commission. Material Facts,~ 2. Second, the Respondent's 

president, having entered an appearance in this proceeding, represented Respondent at the time 

he submitted the May 6 Response. Material Facts ~ 13. Third, the letter from the laboratory 

Ironwood Clay Co., attached as Exhibit B to the May 6 Response, describes the sunscreen as 

follows: "This is to state that Dimethicone, a synthetic ingredient, is 8% in this formula." This 

2 The Secretary rejected California Naturel's May 6 Response as its Answer, finding the May 6 

Response deficient because it lacked a caption, mischaracterized the Complaint as the 

Administrative Law Judge's Complaint, failed to assert any affirmative defenses, and failed to 

put forth any request for relief. Presumably because the May 6 Response was deemed deficient, 

the Administrative Law Judge has not issued a scheduling order in this proceeding. 

4 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

statement, as well as other similar statements by Mr. Duler contained in the Response, plainly 

manifest that California Naturel adopted and believed to be true the statements that the formula 

for Sunscreen SPF 30 contains 8% percent Dimethicone and that Dimethicone is a synthetic 

ingredient. Material Facts, iii! 11-12. Fourth, as Respondent's president and the individual who 

entered his appearance on behalf of Respondent, Mr. Dul er had the authority to make the 

statement. Material Facts, iii! 2 and 13. Finally, Mr. Duler made the statement while he was 

president and represented Respondent in this proceeding. Id. See Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 

Studios, Inc. v. Grol<Ster, Ltd., 454 F.Supp.2d 966, 973 (C.D. Cal. 2006) (documents prepared by 

corporate officers serving in their capacities at the time of the documents' drafting are admissible 

non-hearsay under Rule 801(d)(2)(D)). 

D. California Naturel's False "All Natural" Claims were Express and Therefore 

Presumed to be Material 

Respondent's "all natural" claims were express. Express claims are presumed to be 

material to consumers and it is reasonable for consumers to rely on them. See, e.g., FTC v. 

Pantron I Corp., 33 F.3d 1088, 1095-96 (9th Cir. i994); POM Wonderful, 2013 WL 268926 at 

*52 (FTC Jan. 16, 2013); Novartis Corp. 127 F.T.C. 580, 686 (1999); Deception Statement, 103 

F.T.C. 110, 1984 WL 565319 at *49. Therefore, the claims are deceptive in violation of Section 

5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 45(a). The advertising is 

also false in violation of Section 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 52. 

III. The Relief Set Forth in the Complaint is Appropriate Here 

The Complaint set forth the relief that it determined would be appropriate if the 

allegations are true. Because the record establishes that the allegations are true, it is appropriate 

to issue an order providing the relief set forth in the complaint. 

5 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

This relief is reasonably related to the Commission's allegations because it addresses the 

claim at issue, as well as reasonably related claims that Respondent could make in the future. 

Specifically, because some consumers are likely to reasonably understand "all natural" or other 

composition claims to imply that a product is good for the environment or healthy, the Order also 

covers claims regarding a product's composition, environmental, or health benefits. The order 

prohibits such claims unless they are substantiated by competent and reliable evidence, which 

when appropriate based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area must be competent 

and reliable scientific evidence, and not misleading. 

These provisions are appropriate because an order's provisions may "serve to ' close all 

roads to the prohibited goal, so that (the FTC's) order may not be by-passed with impunity."' 

Litton Indus., Inc. v. FTC, 676 F.2d 364, 370 (9th Cir. 1982) (quoting FTC v. Ruberoid Co., 343 

U.S. 470, 473 (1952)). Such "fencing-in" need only "bear a 'reasonable relation to the unlawful 

practices found to exist.'" Id. (quoting FTC v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 380 U.S. 374, 394-95 

(1965)). Moreover, the proposed relief is substantively identical to the relief set forth in four 

recent consent orders resolving similar allegations issued by the Commission earlier this year.

3 

Issuing a similar order against Respondent would help to maintain a level playing field for all of 

the respondents that allegedly made deceptive "all natural" claims for personal care products. 

IV. Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Order 

A. Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

1. Respondent California Nature!, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal office or 

place of business at 480 Gate 5 Road - Suite 114, Sausalito, California 94965. Material Facts, if 

3. 

3 Trans-India Products, Inc. , No, C-4582 (July 6, 2016); Erickson Marketing Group Inc., No. C4583 (July 6, 2016); ABS Consumer Products, LLC, No. C-4584 (July 6, 2016); and Beyond 

Coastal, No. C-4585 (July 6, 2016). 

6 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

2. Respondent advertised, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed products to 

consumers, including Sunscreen SPF 30. This sunscreen product is a "drug" within the meaning 

of Sections 12 and 15 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Material Facts, ii 4. 

3. The acts and practices of Respondent alleged in this complaint have been in or affecting 

commerce, as "commerce" is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 

Material Facts, ii 5. 

4. Respondent advertises Sunscreen SPF 30 on the Internet. This product retails for $35. 

Material Facts, ii 6. 

5. Respondent disseminated or has caused to be disseminated advertisements for Sunscreen 

SPF 30, including but not limited to Exhibits A-B attached to the Complaint. These materials 

contain the following statements: 

A. California Naturel's "Sunscreen SPF 30" webpage states: 

This soft, luxurious and non-oily all natural sunscreen is formulated with Glacial 

Oceanic Minerals and Zinc Oxide to protect the skin from both UV A and UVB rays. 

It is enriched with antioxidants from botanical sources such as Shea Butter, 

Pomegranate Extract and Marigold Flower Extract to increase skin hydration and 

protection from environmental damage. (emphasis added) 

In addition, the tube of Sunscreen depicted on the webpage is labeled "All Natural." 

Material Facts, ii 9. (emphasis added) 

Exhibit A, Internet webpage (August 2015). 

B. The text under the heading "Our Ingredients" on California Naturel's "Ingredients" 

webpage states: 

California Nature! uses only the purest, most luxurious and effective ingredients 

found in nature. All of our formulas are naturally scented and free of parabens and 

harsh synthetic chemicals. Our ingredients have been thoughtfully selected for their 

highly interactive properties, subtle scents, pleasurable textures and effectiveness on 

skin." (emphasis added) 

Exhibit B, Internet webpage (August 2015). 

Material Facts, iii! 7-10. 

6. In connection with the advertising, labeling, promotion, offering for sale, or sale of 

Sunscreen SPF 30, Respondent has represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by 

implic~tion, that the product is an "all natural" sunscreen. Material Facts, iii! 8-10. 

7 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

7. In fact, Sunscreen SPF 30 is not "all natural" because it contains or contained a synthetic 

ingredient Dimethicone, which is 8% of the product. Therefore, the "all natural" representations 

set forth in Paragraph 6 are false or misleading. Material Facts, iii! 11-12. 

8. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this 

proceeding and of the Respondent. 

9. The acts and practices of Respondent as set forth above constitute unfair or deceptive acts 

or practices, and the making of false advertisements, in or affecting commerce in violation of 

Sections 5(a) and 12 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 

10. The following order is necessary and appropriate under applicable legal precedent and the 

facts of this case. 

B. Proposed Order 

DEFINITIONS 

For purposes of this order, the following definitions shall apply: 

1. Unless otherwise specified, "respondent" shall mean California Naturel, a 

corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers, agents, representatives, and 

employees. 

2. "Commerce" shall mean as defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission 

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44. 

I. 

IT IS ORDERED that respondent, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, 

division, or other device, in connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion, 

offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any product must not make any representation, expressly 

or by implication, including through the use of a product name, trademark, or trade name, about: 

A. whether such product is all natural or 100% natural; 

B. the extent to which such product contains any natural or synthetic ingredient or 

component; 

C. the ingredients or composition of such product; or 

D. the environmental or health benefits of such product, 

unless the representation is non-misleading, including that, at the time such representation is 

made, the respondent possesses and relies upon competent and reliable evidence, which when 

appropriate based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area must be competent and 

8 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

reliable scientific evidence, that is sufficient in quality and quantity based on standards generally 

accepted in the relevant fields when considered in light of the entire body of relevant and reliable 

evidence, to substantiate that the representation is true. For the purposes of this Provision: 

1. "competent and reliable evidence" means tests, analyses, research, studies, or 

other evidence based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area, that 

have been conducted and evaluated in an objective manner by qualified persons, 

using procedures generally accepted in the profession to yield accurate and 

reliable results; and 

2. "competent and reliable scientific evidence" means tests, analyses, research, or 

studies that have been conducted and evaluated in an objective manner by 

qualified persons, using procedures generally accepted in the profession to yield 

accurate and reliable results. 

II. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent California Nature}, and its successors and 

assigns, shall, for five (5) years after the last date of dissemination of any representation covered 

by this order, maintain and upon request make available to the Federal Trade Commission for 

inspection and copying: 

A. All advertisements and promotional materials containing the representation; 

B. All materials that were relied upon in disseminating the representation; and 

C. All tests, reports, studies, surveys, demonstrations, or other evidence in its 

possession or control that contradict, qualify, or call into question the 

representation, or the basis relied upon for the representation, including 

complaints and other communications with consumers or with governmental or 

consumer protection organizations. 

III. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent California Nature!, and its successors and 

assigns, shall deliver a copy of this order to all current and future principals, officers, directors, 

and managers, and to all current and future employees, agents, and representatives having 

responsibilities with respect to the subject matter of this order, and shall secure from each such 

person a signed and dated statement acknowledging receipt of the order. Respondent shall 

deliver this order to current personnel within thirty (30) days after the date of service of this 

order, and to future personnel within thirty (30) days after the person assumes such position or 

responsibilities. Respondent must maintain and upon request make available to the Federal 

Trade Commission for inspection and copying all acknowledgments of receipt of this order 

obtained pursuant to this Part. 

9 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

IV. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent California Naturel, and its successors and 

assigns, shall notify the Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to any change in the 

corporation that may affect compliance obligations arising under this order, including but not 

limited to a dissolution, assignment, sale, merger, or other action that would result in the 

emergence of a successor corporation; the creation or dissolution of a subsidiary, parent, or 

affiliate that engages in any acts or practices subject to this order; the proposed filing of a 

bankruptcy petition; or a change in the corporate name or address. Provided, however, that, with 

respect to any proposed change in the corporation about which respondent learns less than thirty 

(30) days prior to the date such action is to take place, respondent shall notify the Commission as 

soon as is practicable after obtaining such knowledge. Unless otherwise directed by a 

representative of the Commission in writing, all notices required by this Part shall be emailed to 

Debrief@ftc.gov or sent by overnight courier (not the U.S. Postal Service) to: Associate 

Director for Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580. The subject line must begin: In re 

California Naturel, Docket No. C-9370. 

V. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent California Nature!, and its successors and 

assigns, within sixty (60) days after the date of service of this order, shall file with the 

Commission a true and accurate report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form of 

its own compliance with this order. Within ten (10) days of receipt of written notice from a 

representative of the Commission, it shall submit additional true and accurate written reports. 

VI. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the final and effective date of this Order is the 60th day 

after this Order is served. This Order will terminate 20 years from the date of its issuance (which 

is stated at the end of this Order, next to the Commission's seal), or 20 years from the most 

recent date that the United States or the Commission files a complaint (with or without an 

accompanying settlement) in federal court alleging any violation of this Order, whichever comes 

later; provided, however, that the filing of such a complaint will not affect the duration of: 

A. Any Provision in this Order that terminates in less than 20 years; 

B. This Order if such complaint is filed after the Order has terminated pursuant to 

this Provision. If such complaint is dismissed or a federal court rules that the 

Respondent did not violate any provision of the Order, and the dismissal or ruling 

is either not appealed or upheld on appeal, then the Order will terminate according 

to this Provision as though the complaint had never been filed, except that the 

Order will not terminate between the date such complaint is filed and the later of 

the deadline for appealing such dismissal or ruling and the date such dismissal or 

ruling is upheld on appeal. 

10 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

V. Conclusion 

For the reasons set forth above, Complaint Counsel respectfully requests that the 

Commission grant this Motion for Summary Decision and issue an Order against Respondent 

California Naturel, Inc. 

Dated: September 14, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 

11 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

 

 ) 

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

California Naturel, Inc., ) Docket No. 9370 

 a corporation, ) 

 ) 

Respondent. ) 

 ) 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S STATEMENT 

OF MATERIAL FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

Pursuant to Commission Rule 3.24(a), Complaint Counsel, in support of their Motion for 

Summary Decision, submits this Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute, and which, 

therefore, do not create any genuine issue for trial:

1. The Commission issued a Complaint against California Naturel on April 12, 

2016. 

2. California Naturel was served with the Complaint, and on May 6, 2016, John 

Bernard Duler, the president of California Naturel, Inc. submitted a response to the 

Commission’s Complaint (“May 6 Response” attached to Frisby Declaration, Attachment A).

3. California Naturel is a Delaware corporation with its principal office or place of 

business at 480 Gate 5 Road – Suite 114, Sausalito, California 94965. (Complaint ¶ 1; Admitted 

in ¶ 1 of May 6 Response). 

4. California Naturel has advertised, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed 

products to consumers, including Sunscreen SPF 30. This sunscreen product is a “drug” within 

the meaning of Sections 12 and 15 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. (Complaint ¶ 2; 

Admitted in ¶ 2 of May 6 Response). 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT

2

5. The acts and practices of California Naturel have been in or affecting commerce, 

as “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. (Complaint ¶ 3; 

Admitted in ¶ 3 of May 6 Response).

6. California Naturel advertises its product called “Sunscreen SPF 30” on the 

Internet. This product retails for $35. (Complaint ¶ 4; Admitted in ¶ 4 of May 6 Response).

7. Attached to the Complaint are true and correct copies of screen captures from 

California Naturel’s Internet website. (Garland Declaration; Attachment B).

8. The first screen capture is a true and correct copy of California Naturel’s 

Sunscreen SPF 30 webpage, which states:

This soft, luxurious and non-oily all natural sunscreen is formulated with Glacial 

Oceanic Minerals and Zinc Oxide to protect the skin from both UVA and UVB rays. 

It is enriched with antioxidants from botanical sources such as Shea Butter, 

Pomegranate Extract and Marigold Flower Extract to increase skin hydration and 

protection from environmental damage. 

(emphasis added).

9. The tube of Sunscreen depicted on the screen capture of California Naturel’s 

Sunscreen SPF 30 webpage is labeled “All Natural.”

10. The second screen capture is a true and correct copy of the California Naturel’s 

“Ingredients” webpage, which states under the heading, “Our Ingredients”:

California Naturel uses only the purest, most luxurious and effective ingredients 

found in nature. All of our formulas are naturally scented and free of parabens and 

harsh synthetic chemicals. Our ingredients have been thoughtfully selected for their 

highly interactive properties, subtle scents, pleasurable textures and effectiveness on 

skin. 

(emphasis added).

11. Attached as Exhibit B to the May 6 Response is a letter dated November 17, 

2015, addressed to John Bernard Duler from the Director of Research and Development for the 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT

3

laboratory Ironwood Clay Company, Inc. The letter states that for “California Naturel – All 

Natural Sunscreen,” “Dimethicone, a synthetic ingredient, is 8% in this formula.”

12. Additionally, at a number of other places in its May 6 Response, California 

Naturel states that the formula for its Sunscreen contains 8% Dimethicone, a synthetic 

ingredient, but that the remaining 92% of the Suncreen’s ingredients are natural products. See 

May 6 Response at pp. 3, 4, and 5.

13. Mr. Duler has the authority to act on behalf of Respondent California Naturel 

since, in addition to being its president, he entered his pro se appearance on its behalf in this 

proceeding.
ATTACHMENT A
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

May 06, 2017 

From: California Naturel 

480 Gate Five Road, Suite #114 

Sausalito, CA 94965 

To: Office of the Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

Office of the Secretary 

Constitution Center 

ATIACHMENT A 

400 Seventh Street, S.W., Suite 5610 

Washington, D.C. 20024 

Att.: Docket# 9370 

To the attention of D. Michael Chappell, Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Your Honor, 

It is my pleasure to provide answers to your Complaint# 9370. 

Point 1: address is correct 

Point 2: correct, California Naturel sells a sunscreen SPF 

Point 3: correct, this is commerce 

Point 4: correct, we sell this product on the internet 

ORIGINAL 

Point 5 is inaccurate and misleading and this letter will provide some light for the FTC. 

The exhibits provided in your complaint seem to omit several key facts. 

California Nature! has a policy to disclose all ingredients. Your complaint only limits your findings 

to the first lines of the description. In fact we have been praised by consumers and the press for 

our transparency. 

Here an example of one of the latest feedback on ingredients received on April 20, 2016 

From: AVA <rosafiore@gmail.com> 

Date: April 20, 2016 at 15:34:38 PDT 

To: info@ca/ifomianaturel.com 

Subject: LOVE ORGANIC BEAUTY - Online retailer of Beauty+ Wellness 

Hi there! 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT A
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT A
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATIACHMENT A 

ingredients have been used in the formula, but a product can be labeled as natural and 

contain up to 30 percent synthetic ingredients." 

Tu summarize. neither the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act), nor FDA 

regulations, nor the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) define the term "natural." Last year, FDA 

issued a notice (https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentoetail:D=FDA-2014-N-1207-0001) for 

comments regarding the definition of natural for foods. The FDA e~tended 

(https:/lwwvv.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail:D=FDA-2014-N-1207-1827) the comment period 

until May 10, 2016.) 

The FTC's activity regarding natural claims has been even more limited. Decades ago, in the 

'70s the Commission proposed a definition. But. in 1983, it discontinued its plans for a definition 

and announced that it would scrutinize such claims on a case-by-case basis. 

For example, a Google search "all natural sunscreen", most brands, including Honest (!) are 

listed: 

i:~ r.1atuta1 $:.irt:i;croorr 

Shop fQr all n@tural sunscreen on Google 

Ill '. ; ·.N>iosrM;l'l<!lal Hooest.M"'e.tal : Ac:uie OrgalJl<,S . Colore&01ence Bab)gen• 1"" 

' Sui\Screen . ~ ; SP!". 30 Sun ' Mincml; 

: 1i3 ~ : $!! ii~ . ~ $1.71 ' $5?.00- ~i).99 , . HooeSt oom n~ com : Grove. C.Ol!ab. . • ColvreseiellC!l Tdl!lel 

: ~ (ll lilt>re 

To summarize: 

1. Our website has been praised for its transpary, every ingredient in our products is listed 

and explained. See exhibit A. 

2. The FTC asked us to obtain from a lab the exact% of dimethicone in our sunscreen. 

See Exhibit B. 

3. The FTC asked us to show the % of Dimethicone on our website. It was added at the 

end of the sunscreen page (see website). We added "The FTC requires us to add the 

following: "Dimethicone, a synthetic ingredient, is 8% of the sunscreen formula, 

the remaining 92% are natural products." See Exhibit A 

4 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATIACHMENT A 

4. We have put a bright color sticker on our sunscreen packaging, showing "The FTC 

requires us to add the following: " Dimethicone, a synthetic ingredient, Is 8% of the 

sunscreen formula, the remaining 92% are natural products." See Exhibit C 

In conclusion, I am appaled to see the FTC investing valuable resources on such a small case. 

The number of people involved, the communication, the size of the lawsuit lead me to believe 

that a considerable amount of energy was wasted in this case. Let me give you some numbers: 

We have sold 10 {read TEN tubes of sunscreen SPF 30) in the period January 01 , 2016 - April 

30, 2016 . Yes, you have read correctly that we generated $350 in gross revenues for the sale 

of our SPF 30 sunscreen. Those 10 tubes of sunscreen have been sold to 7 happy customers. I 

don't think any of them were harmed in any way and all of them praise our ingredients 

disclosure and transparency. 

Since the numbers are so small, it will very easy and very simple to directly ask those 7 

customers. 

Best regards, 

John Bernard Duler 

President 

Courtesy copies (subject line: docket# 9370): 

oalj@ftc.gov 

ElectronicFilings@ftc.gov 

5 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT A
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

-

·I C,:I • " •• .,.\to•':' "" l "I ? t 

'·':- "•\I f \ o • t ., • I. ' ' 

........ -·· - ., ••• "'·' - · -:r. ., ... qo> • - • ' • ' <" • ~ .,. ~ ll"'"' . " •. .,. .. .... . •• , . 

ATIACHMENT A 

wy rnna nve taos rn tne upper ngnt corner. 

- -·-· /rhe tab "ingredients" is highly visible and 

_ .:r ~ccessible 

,. 

Click on Tab# 3 :ingredients 

After you click on the tab "ingredients" 

.A u land on t he page shown on t he left. 

If' Every ingredient is listed. 

If you click on a specific ingredient, you 

will the description and explanation 

If you find the whole list overwhelming, 

you can narrow to a specific product. In 

your case you want to click on "sunscreen" 

.. . -.. . - " "'' "' 

For the sunscreen ingredients, 

dimethicone is shown on the right 

(the position rotates every time) . 

It says "Dimethicone is a siliconebased polymer and used as a skin 

protect ant. 

.. ... . .... •• .. ...-.<:-.-·· ,. .... ........ ... • ....... .. ................. #·- , . .... "" ,.. , . ..... , --: 1<> -.... . .. - .-- • ' " 

Our lngndlents 

.... :.:: · ::. -... :..:... : ----===:1-- 'L· ... ·~ . .-.... - ~ 

This is another case where Dimethicone 

is the first ingredient listed on the left 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATIACHMENT A 

'''!I 

......... 

I = e-.e 

If the list of ingredients was not sufficient, we added 

the following at the bottom of the page: 

The FTC requires us to add the 

following: "Dimethicone, a 

synthetic ingredient, is 8% of the 

sunscreen formula, the remaining 

92% are natural products." 

The Wall StreetJournal reporter picked that up right 

away when she landed on the page. Since she could 

not figure out what the issue was since Dimethicone 

was not only listed, but we had added a sentence 

showing the 8%, she called the FTC but nobody was 

able to provide her with an answer. 

Let's look now at the products tab. 

When you click on the "products" tab, or even 

if you mouse over, depending on your 

computer setup, click on "Sunscreen SPF 30) 

You land on the sunscreen SPF 30 page. 

Your complaint mentions the top of the 

page "This soft, luxurious and non-oily all 

natural sunscreen is formulated with 

Glacial Oceanic Minerals and Zinc Oxide 

to protect the skin from both UVA and 

UVB rays". 

But it fails to show the most important, 

the ingredients, shown at the bottom of 

the page. We list "Zinc Oxyde" as the 

sole active ingredients. ti.!! other 

ingredients are listed, using the same 

font. 

It is where you find Dimethicone, and if 

you click on that word, it will take you to 

the ingredients page describin~ what 

Dimethicone is "a silicone-based 

polymer and used as a skin protectant". 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

Jchn Bernard Doler 

CO::ttunder & CEO . 

Caf!fomia Natui'eL f nc. 

4.ao·Gate 5 Road. Si.lite #114 

. saus011to. CA 94965 

USA . 

Dea.r McOular. 

TtiiS is to st:ate that 01inethlcone. a synthetic 1ngnulient, I~ 8% .m th$ formu:a. 

~ ·· .. HoUyXlf'lg .. 

Dire~tor ot Resear.ch a.nd. Development 

.. : ,.- f';;:>P ,; i_,.,- ~:;)i',.,P ' ' : > ti.!C 

Exhit.)it B 

li'41T .; h . -::. ~ ,lt',·;';·':!.!r.[;'f:, R~ ··1r._ f,:::.tif.J'J N~ . B ::;. VVJ . ..:Lil t;:A IV>.OA 
ATTACHM

ENT A 

Exh!·bit C 
PUBLIC DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT B 

DECLARATION OF BRITTANI 

GARLAND 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1746 

I, Brittani Garland, hereby state that 1 have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below. If 

called as a witness, I could and would competently testify as follows: 

l. I am a United States citizen and am over eighteen years of age. I am employed by the 

Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") as a Program Support Specialist in the Bureau of 

Consumer Protection's Division of Enforcement. My business address is 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Mail Drop CC-9528, Washington, DC, 20580. I have been 

assigned to work on the investigation of California Naturel, Inc. I executed the activities 

described in this declaration as a part of my job. 

2. In my capacity as a Program Support Specialist, 1 have investigated the promotion of a 

product called Sunscreen SPF 30 by California Naturel, Inc. Among other things, I have 

located advertisements for this product on a public Internet website 

www.califomianaturel.com, and I have made accurate recordings of these advertisements. 

3. In connection with the above-referenced matter, I retrieved and recorded the following two 

advertisements. I recorded them from the above website on the dates identified below: 

a. California Nature!. Exhibit A (recorded from website www.califomianarurel.com 

on July 29, 2015 and attached as Exhibit A to the FTC's complaint issued on April 

11, 2016 in Docket No. 9370) 

b. California Naturel - Our Ingredients.Exhbit B (recorded from website 

'\-vww.californianaturel.com on August 13, 2015 and attached as Exhibit B to the 

FTC's complaint issued on April 11, 2016 in Docket No. 9370) 

4. I have compared the Commission complaint exhibits to the advertisements that I recorded, 

and I hereby verify that the documents marked as complaint Exhibits A and B are true and 

accurate copies of the advertisements that I recorded. 

5. I declare pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, that the foregoing is true and correct. 

EXECUTED ON May 31, 2016 
Notice of Electronic Service

I hereby certify that on September 14, 2016, I filed an electronic copy of the foregoing Complaint Counsel's

Motion for Summary Decision, with:

D. Michael Chappell

Chief Administrative Law Judge

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Suite 110

Washington, DC, 20580

Donald Clark

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Suite 172

Washington, DC, 20580

I hereby certify that on September 14, 2016, I served via E-Service an electronic copy of the foregoing

Complaint Counsel's Motion for Summary Decision, upon:

Robert Frisby

Attorney

Federal Trade Commission

rfrisby@ftc.gov

Complaint

John Singer

Attorney

Federal Trade Commission

jsinger@ftc.gov

Complaint

I hereby certify that on September 14, 2016, I served via other means, as provided in 4.4(b) of the foregoing

Complaint Counsel's Motion for Summary Decision, upon:

john bernard duler

president

california natural

jbduler@californianaturel.com

Respondent

Robert Frisby

Attorney