Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 1 of 28 PageID #: 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

B4B EARTH TEA LLC, a limited liability 

company; 

B4B CORP., a corporation; and 

ANDREW MARTIN SINCLAIR, individually 

and as an officer of B4B EARTH TEA LLC and 

B4B CORP., 

Defendants. 

COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL 

PENALTIES, PERMANENT 

INJUNCTION, MONETARY 

RELIEF, AND OTHER RELIEF 

Civil Action No.: &9

Plaintiff, the United States of America, acting upon notification and authorization to the 

Attorney General by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), pursuant to Section 16(a)(1) of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 56(a)(1), and on behalf of the United 

States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), alleges: 

NATURE OF THE CASE 

1. The United States brings this action for permanent injunctive relief, civil 

penalties, and other remedies pursuant to the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), § 45(m)(1)(A), § 52, 

and § 57a(a)(1)(B), the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 116-260, Title XIV, 

§ 1401(b)(1), and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. § 331(d), 

against B4B Earth Tea LLC, B4B Corp., and Andrew Martin Sinclair (“Defendants”). The 

1 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 2 of 28 PageID #: 2 

Defendants manufacture and sell an herbal tea product called B4B Earth Tea Extra Strength 

(“Earth Tea”). Defendants sell Earth Tea for $60 per 16-ounce bottle. Defendants have been 

advertising Earth Tea on social media and the internet as a product capable of preventing and 

treating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (“COVID-19”), even claiming that it is more effective 

than the available COVID-19 vaccines. Defendants lack competent and reliable scientific bases 

for these claims, and their use of deceptive advertising and misinformation, exploiting fears in 

the midst of a pandemic to sell their product to concerned consumers, poses a significant risk to 

public health and safety. 

2. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has repeatedly warned Defendants that 

their deceptive advertising and misrepresentations violate the FTC Act and the COVID-19 

Consumer Protection Act. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has similarly 

warned Defendants that as currently marketed, Earth Tea is an unapproved new drug, and its 

sale into interstate commerce a violation of the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. § 331(d). Despite these 

warnings, Defendants continue to make deceptive and misleading statements about the ability of 

Earth Tea to prevent and treat COVID-19. The United States therefore brings this suit seeking 

permanent injunctive relief, civil penalties, and other remedies in order to prevent the harms 

caused by Defendants’ ongoing misrepresentations. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to (1) 28 

U.S.C. § 1331, because it arises under the law of the United States; (2) 28 U.S.C. § 1337(a), 

because it arises under an Act of Congress regulating interstate commerce or protecting trade 

and commerce against restraints and monopolies; (3) 28 U.S.C. § 1345, because the United 

States is the Plaintiff; (4) 28 U.S.C. §1355, because the United States seeks a civil penalty; and 

2 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 3 of 28 PageID #: 3 

(5) 21 U.S.C. 332(a) for violations of Section 331 of the FDCA. 

4. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants have maintained a substantial 

course of trade in or affecting commerce, as “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the FTC Act, 

15 U.S.C. § 44. 

5. The Court has personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the majority of 

Defendants reside in this district and because the alleged acts giving rise to the claims occurred 

in this District. 

6. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c), and 15 

U.S.C. § 53(b), because the majority of Defendants reside in this District and because a 

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

PARTIES 

7. Plaintiff is the United States of America. 

8. Defendant B4B Earth Tea LLC is a New York limited liability company with its 

principal place of business at 40 Remsen Ave., Brooklyn, New York 11212. B4B Earth Tea 

LLC transacts or has transacted business in this District and throughout the United States. At all 

times relevant to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Defendant B4B Earth 

Tea LLC has manufactured, advertised, marketed, distributed, or sold Earth Tea, an herbal tea 

containing water, honey, aloe vera, and herbs, to consumers throughout the United States. 

9. Defendant B4B Corp. is a Michigan corporation with the address of the 

incorporator listed at 19179 Ilene St., Detroit, Michigan 28221. On information and belief, B4B 

Corp. conducts business at 40 Remsen Ave., Brooklyn, New York 11212, and transacts or has 

transacted business in this District and throughout the United States. At all times relevant to this 

3 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 4 of 28 PageID #: 4 

Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, B4B Corp. has manufactured, advertised, 

marketed, distributed, or sold Earth Tea, an herbal tea containing water, honey, aloe vera, and 

herbs, to consumers throughout the United States. 

10. Defendant Andrew Martin Sinclair, who also calls himself “Busta Sinclair,” is the 

sole individual identified as founder, owner, agent, or principal officer of B4B Earth Tea LLC 

and B4B Corp. (jointly, “Corporate Defendants”). At all times relevant to this Complaint, acting 

alone or in concert with others, Defendant Sinclair has formulated, directed, controlled, had the 

authority to control, or participated in the acts and practices of the Corporate Defendants, 

including the acts and practices set forth in this Complaint. Defendant Sinclair is actively 

involved in Corporate Defendants’ business affairs. He created and manufactures Earth Tea and 

participates in promotions for Earth Tea through, among other things, posts on Facebook, 

TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube accounts; personal appearances in videos posted on 

TikTok, Twitter, and YouTube; broadcasts on Instagram; and email communications with 

consumers who order Earth Tea. He has made representations in these online videos and social 

media posts about the purported efficacy of Earth Tea to prevent, mitigate, treat, or cure 

COVID-19. He also responded directly to a February 18, 2021 joint warning letter from the 

FTC and FDA to B4B Corp. about false or unsubstantiated advertising claims about Earth Tea 

and to subsequent communications from FTC staff. Defendant Sinclair resides in this District 

and, in connection with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business in this 

District and throughout the United States. 

THE FTC ACT 

11. Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts 

4 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 5 of 28 PageID #: 5 

or practices in or affecting commerce.” 

12. Misrepresentations or deceptive omissions of material fact constitute deceptive 

acts or practices prohibited by Section 5(a) of the FTC Act. 

13. Section 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 52, prohibits the dissemination of any 

false advertisement in or affecting commerce for the purpose of inducing, or which is likely to 

induce, the purchase of food, drugs, devices, services, or cosmetics. For the purposes of Section 

12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 52, Earth Tea is a “drug” as defined in Section 15(c) of the FTC 

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 55(c). 

THE COVID-19 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 

14. On January 31, 2020, the Secretary of Health and Human Services declared that 

COVID-19 had caused a public health emergency. As of the date of the filing of this complaint, 

the public health emergency remains in effect. 

15. The COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on December 27, 2020, 

makes it unlawful, for the duration of the ongoing novel coronavirus (COVID-19) public health 

emergency, for any person, partnership, or corporation to engage in a deceptive act or practice in 

or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), that is 

associated with the treatment, cure, prevention, mitigation, or diagnosis of COVID-19. COVID19 Consumer Protection Act of the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Pub. L. No. 116-260, 

Title XIV, § 1401(b)(1). 

16. A violation of Section (b)(1) of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act is 

treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice proscribed under 

section 18(a)(1)(B) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57a(a)(1)(B). COVID-19 Act, § 1401(c)(1). 

5 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 6 of 28 PageID #: 6 

17. A violation of Section (b)(1) of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act made 

with the knowledge required by Section 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A), is 

subject to monetary civil penalties of not more than $46,517 for each violation of the COVID-19 

Consumer Protection Act after January 13, 2021, including penalties whose associated violation 

predated January 13, 2021. See 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A), as modified by Section 4 of the Federal 

Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, 28 U.S.C. § 2461, the Federal Civil Penalties 

Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, Public Law 114-74, sec. 701, 129 Stat. 599 

(2015); see also 16 C.F.R. § 1.98(d). 

THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT 

18. A product is a drug within the meaning of the FDCA if, among other things, it is 

“intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man.” 

21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B). 

19. The intended use of a product “refer[s] to the objective intent of the persons 

legally responsible for the labeling of drugs” and may be determined from any relevant source, 

including the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the article, product labeling, 

advertising, promotional material, or oral or written statements by such persons or their 

representatives. See 21 C.F.R. § 201.128. 

20. The FDCA defines labeling as “all labels and other written, printed, or graphic 

matter (1) upon any article or any of its containers or wrappers, or (2) accompanying such 

article.” 21 U.S.C. § 321(m). The term “accompanying” in the second clause of 21 U.S.C. § 

321(m) is not restricted to labels that are on or in the article at issue; physical attachment to the 

article is not necessary. See Kordel v. United States, 335 U.S. 345, 349-50 (1948). It is the 

6 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 7 of 28 PageID #: 7 

textual relationship and integrated nature of the transaction that is significant. See id. at 350. 

21. A “new drug” is defined as any drug “the composition of which is such that such 

drug is not generally recognized, among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to 

evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drugs, as safe and effective for use under the conditions 

prescribed, recommended, or suggested in the labeling thereof. . . . ; or any drug . . . the 

composition of which is such that such drug, as a result of investigations to determine its safety 

and effectiveness for use under such conditions, has become so recognized, but which has not, 

otherwise than in such investigations, been used to a material extent or for a material time under 

such conditions.” 21 U.S.C. § 321(p). 

22. The FDCA prohibits doing or causing the introduction or delivery for introduction 

into interstate commerce of any new drug unless FDA has approved a new drug application 

(“NDA”) or an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”) with respect to such drug, or such 

drug is exempt from approval because, for example, it is the subject of an approved 

investigational new drug application (“IND”). 21 U.S.C. §§ 331(d) and 355(a), (b), (i), and (j). It 

is a violation of the Act to introduce or deliver, or cause to be introduced or delivered, into 

interstate commerce a new drug that is neither approved nor exempt from approval. 21 U.S.C. § 

331(d). 

DEFENDANTS’ UNLAWFUL CONDUCT 

I. Defendants Deceptively Advertise Earth Tea as a Drug That Prevents or Treats 

COVID-19 

23. Defendants are the sole manufacturers of Earth Tea. Defendants sell Earth Tea for 

$60 per 16-ounce bottle, and consumers can purchase Earth Tea through the Corporate 

Defendants’ website, b4bearthteallc.com (formerly b4bcorp.com). 

7 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 8 of 28 PageID #: 8 

24. Since at least April 2020, Defendants have advertised Earth Tea to prevent, 

mitigate, treat, or cure COVID-19. Defendants advertise, label, or promote Earth Tea on the 

Internet, including on the website b4bearthteallc.com (formerly b4bcorp.com), and through 

social media posts and videos, including on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, and 

YouTube. 

25. Through the websites b4bearthteallc.com and b4bcorp.com, and postings on 

TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube, Defendants disseminated or caused to be 

disseminated advertisements for Earth Tea, including but not necessarily limited to the following 

statements and depictions. 

A. Claims that Earth Tea Prevents or Treats COVID-19 

26. Defendants have posted on social media multiple claims that Earth Tea prevents 

or treats COVID-19, as illustrated by the following screenshots: 

Twitter b4bcorpusa Aug. 4, 2020 (captured 01.28.2021) 

“Covid 19 Stopper Movement 

EARTH TEA PROVEN 

NATURAL TREATMENT FOR 

COVID-19.. BY B4B CORP 

WORK IN MINUTES GET U 

FEELING NORMAL WITHIN 

24HRS.. EARTHTEA.US 

#COVID19 #CORONAVIRUS” 

“EARTH TEA PROVEN 

TREATMENT FOR COVID-19 

WORKS WITHIN MINUTES 

GET OUT OF QUARANTINE 

WITHIN 24HRS 

GUARANTEED 

EARTHTEA.US” 

8 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 9 of 28 PageID #: 9 

Twitter b4bcorpusa Oct. 9, 2020 (captured 1.28.21) 

“Covid 19 Stopper Movement 

To this day.. Earth Tea is the 

most effective Treatment 

against#COVID19 as 

Treatment and Prevention..All 

NaturAl..#TRYEARTHTEA 

Get well in 28-48 Hours..72 

Hours MAX..” 

Facebook HGmotorcorp with TikTok Video (captured 9.16.21) 

[Embedded TikTok Video 

narrated by Defendant Sinclair 

demonstrating how to consume 

Earth Tea to “get rid of Covid19.” Video superscript appears 

through duration of video “One 

Bottle is all it Takes! Earth Tea 

Covid-19 Stopper”] 

9 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 10 of 28 PageID #: 10 

YouTube Earthtea.US Feb. 8, 2021 (captured 10.18.21) 

[Defendant Sinclair discusses how he 

was cured of Covid-19, and how 48 

consumers who tried Earth Tea were 

cured.] 

“[W]e’re up to 48 out of 48. That’s 48 

people who called and said they have 

symptoms or they tested positive and 

they tried Earth Tea.... They get a bottle. 

Drink half cold and then half hot before 

they go to bed, wake up the next 

morning, the symptoms gone.” 

“I understand the skepticism.... But I’ll 

say you don’t have to die, you don’t 

have to suffer.... You get this tea, you 

drink it, you go to sleep and wake up 

tomorrow...you’re good to go.” 

TikTok B4BEarthtea Aug. 28, 2021 (captured 10.13.21) 

[Defendant Sinclair appears in 

and narrates “COVID19 

CHALLENGE” demonstrating 

how to consume Earth Tea to get 

rid of Covid-19.] 

“Pour half the bottle in a cup cold 

and then you drink the other half 

hot before you go to sleep, all 

right? Simple.... And then guess 

what? COVID-19, gone.” 

10 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 11 of 28 PageID #: 11 

Facebook b4bcorpUSA Sep. 3, 2021 (captured 10.20.21) 

“Vax or Not Grab 2 bottles keep 

it in your freezer in case 

Covid19hits. Frozen will last for 

1 year. DON’T DIE FROM 

COVID19. Protect yourself and 

your family. We are 100% sure 

we can save you!” 

B. Claims That Scientific Research Proves Earth Tea Prevents or Treats 

COVID-19 

27. Defendants compound their misrepresentations that Earth Tea prevents or treats 

COVID-19, with unsubstantiated claims that there is competent and reliable scientific research 

that supports these misrepresentations. In fact, at present, there is no published report of any 

well-controlled human clinical study to substantiate that Earth Tea can treat, prevent, or cure 

COVID-19. Defendants purport to possess anecdotal evidence from customers, and they also 

rely on a 15-person purported study that Defendants state was conducted in India. Neither the 

purported anecdotal reports nor this small, unpublished study suffices as competent and reliable 

scientific evidence to substantiate the claimed health benefits. 

28. The study, as described in a report on Defendants’ b4bearthteallc.com website, 

purportedly consisted of a single group of 15 adults with “mild COVID-19” who were evaluated 

for symptoms, given two 8-ounce doses of Earth Tea and evaluated again four to five days later. 

11 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 12 of 28 PageID #: 12 

The report claims, without documentation or any supporting data analysis, that there was 

“statistically significant efficacy” of the product including “a significant result” in RT-PCR lab 

tests for the COVID-19 infection. The unpublished results of this study, even if accurately 

presented in the report on Defendants’ website, do not comprise competent and reliable scientific 

evidence of any benefit of Earth Tea relating to COVID-19. Among other reasons, there was no 

control group to establish that Earth Tea performed any better than a placebo. The anecdotal 

reports are not documented, and even if accurate, do not constitute competent and reliable human 

clinical evidence that consuming Earth Tea caused any improvement in COVID-19 symptoms. 

29. Notwithstanding this, Defendants disseminated or caused to be disseminated 

statements claiming that the clinical trial establishes that Earth Tea is effective at preventing or 

treating COVID-19, including the following: 

Facebook b4bcorpUSA July 13, 2021 (captured 10.20.21) 

“B4BCorp is sharing a COVID19 Update....Earth Tea works!! 

The all natural instant immune 

booster clinical trial proves its 

effective against Covid19.” 

12 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 13 of 28 PageID #: 13 

Website b4bcorp.com (captured 09.16.21) 

“Our Clinical Trial was 

successful. So successful we 

are offering Money Back 

Guarantee against covid-19 if 2 

bottles do not get you negative 

you will get your money back!” 

“Our First clinical trial was done 

in India in July of 2021 sixteen 

months after our first success 

against Covid-19... to prove Earth 

Tea Extra Strength is safe and 

effective and works against 

Covid-19. We had 15 people who 

was tested positive for Covid-19 

tried one bottle of Earth Tea Extra 

Strength.... They were then tested 

48 hrs after, here’s the result. 14 

came back Negative and 1 came 

back Positive.... The great news 

is all survived and all 15 avoided 

any need for help.” 

13 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 14 of 28 PageID #: 14 

Facebook b4bcorpUSA Aug. 3, 2021 (captured 10.20.21) 

“Covid19NEWS! We are on a 

Mission to Unmask the World!! 

Trial documents to be shared 

soon!! 15 people who tested 

positive tried Earth Tea Extra 

Strength 16 oz bottle they took 8 

oz cold during the day and then 8 

oz hot before bed. They were 

tested 48 hours after and the 

result is 14 came back with 

Negative and 1 came back 

positive.” 

Facebook b4bcorpUSA April 26, 2021 (captured 10.8.21) 

“Our Goal is Zero Death, Zero 

Ventilator, Zero Suffering, Zero 

Hospitalization, Zero Long 

Haulers. Is that possible? Our 

first Clinical Trial Report will 

show that Nature Rules! Watch 

us lead the fight against 

#Covid19 with the world’s most 

powerful natural Supplement!” 

14 
 

 

Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 15 of 28 PageID #: 15 

Instagram b4bearthteallc Aug. 3, 2021 (captured 10.13.2021) 

“Ourclinical Trials documents to 

be published soon! Stay 

Tuned!!...15 people who was 

tested positive tried Earth Tea 

Extra Strength 16 oz 

bottle....They were then tested 48 

hrs after and the result is 14 came 

back with Negative and 1 came 

back positive....From internal 

study if 1 bottle won’t do 2 or 3 

will get rid of COVID19 

‘guaranteed’...” 

C. Claims That Earth Tea Is More Effective at Preventing and Treating 

COVID-19 than Vaccination 

30. Defendants also disseminated or caused to be disseminated claims, including the 

following, that Earth Tea is more effective than vaccination at preventing or treating 

COVID-19. 

Instagram b4bearthteallc Oct. 31, 2021 (captured 11.03.2021) 

15 

[Picture of vial labeled 

“COVID-19 Vaccine” and a 

bottle of Earth Tea] 

“Which one is 100% effective 

with 0 Side effects” 

“#COVID19 TRIALS 

REPORT IS THE ANSWER 

NOT WHAT LEADERS 

WANT.. COMPARE 

BOTH..” 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 16 of 28 PageID #: 16 

Instagram b4bearthteallc Sept. 10, 2021 (captured 10.13.21) 

“#vaccines 

#EARTHTEAEXTRASTRENGTH 

Vaccines trial shows preventing 

hospitalization is 85%-96% while 

so far Earth Tea Extra Strength is 

100% we have helped people who 

are vaccinated. No one who was 

positive and used Earth Tea went 

to the hospital.” 

II. Defendants’ Deceptive Health Claims about Their Product are Harming Consumers 

31. Defendants deceptively advertise that Earth Tea prevents or treats COVID-19, 

and that its efficacy is superior to the current COVID-19 vaccines. 

32. Such baseless claims of health benefits are material, because, as prominent 

claimed benefits of Earth Tea, they are plainly a primary reason that anyone would pay $60 to 

purchase a bottle of Earth Tea. 

33. Upon information and belief, Defendants have earned a substantial amount of 

money from sales of its Earth Tea product during the pandemic, indicating that Defendants’ 

unsubstantiated claims of efficacy against COVID-19 have led to consumers buying the product. 

34. In addition, Defendants’ claims may cause consumers to ingest Earth Tea in lieu 

of other measures to prevent COVID-19, such as getting vaccinated, social distancing, and 

16 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 17 of 28 PageID #: 17 

wearing a mask. In fact, the following statements, excerpted from the examples of Defendants’ 

advertising provided above, appear to encourage this: 

“Vax [vaccinated] or Not . . . . DON’T DIE FROM COVID19. Protect yourself and your 

family. We are 100% sure we can save you!” (Facebook b4bcorpUSA posted Sept. 3, 

2021); 

“COVID19 POSITIVE? VAX OR NO VAX GRAB 2 BOTTLES OF EARTH TEA 

EXTRA STRENGTH AND GET OVER IT WITHIN 48HRS” (Instagram b4bearthteallc 

posted Sept. 10, 2021); 

“COVID19NEWS! We are on a Mission to Unmask the World!!” (Facebook 

b4bcorpUSA posted Aug. 3, 2021); 

“Vaccines trial shows preventing hospitalization is 85%-96% while so far Earth Tea 

Extra Strength is 100%” (Instagram b4bearthteallc posted Sept. 10, 2021). 

IV. Defendants Refuse to Cease Deceptive Advertising Despite Notice from FTC and 

FDA 

35. Defendants have continued to make these and other deceptive and unsubstantiated 

claims about Earth Tea despite multiple written warnings from FTC and FDA that such conduct 

violates the law and may lead to legal action by the government. 

36. A February 18, 2021 warning letter issued jointly by the FTC and the FDA 

informed Defendant B4B Corp. that its b4bcorp.com website and its b4bcorpusa Twitter account 

were unlawfully advertising Earth Tea for the mitigation, prevention, treatment, diagnosis or 

cure of COVID-19, including by making the following claims about Earth Tea: “confirmed to 

stop coughing from Covid-19 100%”; “#1 choice to get people off the #ventilator not only for 

17 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 18 of 28 PageID #: 18 

covid19 but in general”; “our official formula now 100% guarantee to get rid of #Covid19”; and 

“the most effective Treatment against #COVID19.” Complaint, Ex. A (Feb. 18, 2021 warning 

ltr.) at 4. The warning letter stated, in part: 

It is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a 

product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you 

possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when 

appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the 

claims are true at the time they are made. For COVID-19, no such study is 

currently known to exist for the product identified above [Earth Tea]. Thus, 

any coronavirus-related prevention claims regarding such products are not 

supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. You must 

immediately cease making all such claims. 

37. In the warning letter, FDA also informed Defendants that the Earth Tea “product 

is an unapproved new drug” and “a misbranded drug” in violation of the FDCA. Ex. A at 2. The 

Warning Letter explained: “FDA considers your product(s) referenced above to be unapproved 

and misbranded products that cannot be legally sold to consumers in the United States.” Ex. A at 

4. The warning letter further stated that failure to correct the violations could result in legal 

action, including an injunction. Ex. A at 3. 

38. Defendant Sinclair responded to the February 18, 2021 warning letter on February 

19, 2021 and to subsequent communications with FTC staff. Subsequently, Defendants removed 

their claims of Earth Tea’s efficacy against COVID-19 from their websites and social media 

accounts. In March 2021, FDA and FTC indicated to Defendants that it appeared that Defendants 

had addressed the violations included in the warning letter. FDA’s letter to this effect also 

reminded Defendants that they had a continuing responsibility to comply with the FDCA and 

other relevant legal authority. 

39. By April 2021, however, Defendants had resumed making claims that Earth Tea 

18 
 

Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 19 of 28 PageID #: 19 

could prevent, mitigate, treat and cure COVID-19 and added claims that these health benefits 

were purportedly backed by a clinical trial. On September 29, 2021, FTC staff emailed 

Defendant Sinclair to inform him that Defendants’ express and implied claims about the benefits 

of Earth Tea for COVID-19 were unsubstantiated and violated both the FTC Act and the 

COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”). Defendants kept making such claims despite 

this warning. 

40. To date, Defendants have not received approval for a NDA, ANDA, or IND 

Application1

 for Earth Tea, and they continue to cause the distribution of this unapproved new 

drug in interstate commerce. Accordingly, unless restrained by this Court, Defendants will 

continue to violate the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. § 331(d), in the manner set forth above. 

41. Based on the facts and violations of law alleged in this Complaint, the United 

States has reason to believe that Defendants are violating or are about to violate FTC and FDA 

laws enforced by the United States. Among other reasons, Defendants have engaged in their 

unlawful acts and practices willfully and knowingly despite being clearly advised of their 

illegality in the joint FDA/FTC warning letter and in subsequent communications with FTC staff 

in February and March of 2021. Although Defendants may have briefly discontinued deceptive 

and false claims about the benefits of Earth Tea for COVID-19, they have resumed their 

unlawful acts and practices and continue such practices despite additional communications from 

1

 An NDA is the vehicle through which drug sponsors formally propose that the FDA approve a new 

pharmaceutical for sale and marketing in the United States. An ANDA contains data which is submitted to 

FDA for the review and potential approval of a generic drug product. An IND application is submitted by 

applicants who propose to study an unapproved drug or an approved product for a new indication or in a 

new patient population, or who seek authorization for the use of an experimental drug in an emergency 

situation or for serious or immediately life-threatening conditions. 

19 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 20 of 28 PageID #: 20 

FTC staff on September 29, 2021, showing that permanent injunctive relief is necessary and 

appropriate. 

COUNT ONE 

FTC Act Section 5(a) and Section 12 Violations 

42. Paragraphs 1 through 42 are incorporated as if set forth herein. 

43. In numerous instances in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, 

offering for sale, or sale of Earth Tea, including through the statements reflected above, 

Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that Earth Tea: 

a. prevents COVID-19; 

b. treats the symptoms of COVID-19; 

c. cures COVID-19; 

d. leads to recovery from COVID-19 within 48 hours; 

e. is 100% effective in preventing hospitalization from COVID-19; 

f. is more effective than a vaccine in preventing hospitalization from COVID19; 

g. is clinically proven effective to treat and cure COVID-19; and 

h. is clinically proven to cure COVID-19 in 48 hours. 

44. The foregoing representations are false or misleading, or were not substantiated at 

the time the representations were made. 

45. In truth and in fact, Defendants have no competent and reliable scientific evidence 

that any of Defendants’ statements identified in Paragraph 43(a)-(h) are true. 

46. Therefore, the making of the representations as set forth in Paragraph 43 of this 

20 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 21 of 28 PageID #: 21 

Complaint constitutes a deceptive act or practice and the making of false advertisements in 

violation of Sections 5(a) and 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a), 52. 

47. Defendants committed the violations set forth in Paragraph 43 with the 

knowledge required by Section 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A). 

48. Defendants’ representations are material to consumers because they relate to 

COVID-19 prevention and treatment, subjects that are very important to many consumers. 

49. Upon information and belief, Defendants continue to make similar 

misrepresentations regarding the efficacy of Earth Tea for preventing or treating COVID-19. 

50. Upon information and belief, consumers are suffering, have suffered, and will 

continue to suffer substantial injury as a result of Defendants’ violations of the FTC Act. Upon 

information and belief, absent injunctive relief by this Court, Defendants are likely to continue to 

injure consumers and harm the public interest. 

COUNT TWO 

COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act Violations 

51. Paragraphs 1 through 51 are incorporated as if set forth herein. 

52. In numerous instances since December 27, 2020, Defendants have made false, 

misleading, or unsubstantiated representations that Earth Tea is effective for the prevention or 

treatment of COVID-19. 

53. In support of their advertising, marketing, promotion, offering for sale, or sale of 

Earth Tea, Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that 

there is a causal connection between Earth Tea and the prevention or treatment of COVID-19, 

including claims that Earth Tea: 

21 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 22 of 28 PageID #: 22 

a. prevents COVID-19; 

b. treats the symptoms of COVID-19; 

c. cures COVID-19; 

d. leads to recovery from COVID-19 within 48 hours; 

e. is 100% effective in preventing hospitalization from COVID-19; 

f. is more effective than a vaccine in preventing hospitalization from 

COVID-19; 

g. is clinically proven effective to treat and cure COVID-19; and 

h. is clinically proven to cure COVID-19 in 48 hours. 

54. Defendants’ representations are false or misleading, or were not substantiated at 

the time the representations were made. 

55. Defendants’ representations are material to consumers’ decisions. 

56. Defendants have been aware of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act since at 

least on or about February 18, 2021. 

57. Upon information and belief, Defendants continue to make similar 

misrepresentations regarding the efficacy of Earth Tea for treating or preventing COVID-19. 

58. These ongoing false, misleading, or unsubstantiated representations constitute 

deceptive acts or practices in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, § 45(a). 

59. Therefore, these representations also constitute deceptive acts or practices in 

violation of Section 1401(b)(1) of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act. 

60. Each dissemination of an advertisement that makes deceptive COVID-19-related 

representations is a separate violation of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act subject to civil 

22 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 23 of 28 PageID #: 23 

penalties. 

61. On January 31, 2020, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II, 

pursuant to his authority under Section 319 of the Public Health Service Act, declared that 

COVID-19 had caused a public health emergency, which remained in effect throughout the 

activities detailed in this Complaint and beyond. 

62. Enacted on December 27, 2020, the CCPA makes it unlawful, for the duration of 

the public health emergency declared on January 31, 2020 pursuant to Section 319 of the Public 

Health Service Act, for any person, partnership, or corporation to “engage in a deceptive act or 

practice in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the [FTC] Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)) 

that is associated with . . . the treatment, cure, prevention, mitigation, or diagnosis of COVID19.” Pub. L. 116-260, 134 Stat 1182, Title XIV, Section 1401(b)(1). 

63. The CCPA provides that “[a] violation of subsection (b) shall be treated as a 

violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under Section 

18(a)(1)(B) of the [FTC] Act.” 15 U.S.C. § 57a(a)(1)(B). 

64. Section 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A), as modified by 

Section 4 of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, 28 U.S.C. § 2461, as 

amended, and as implemented by 16 C.F.R. § 1.98(d), authorizes this Court to award monetary 

civil penalties of up to $46,517 for each violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act pursuant to the 

CCPA, 16 C.F.R. § 1.98(d). 

65. Upon information and belief, consumers are suffering, have suffered, and will 

continue to suffer substantial injury as a result of Defendants’ violations of the FTC Act and the 

COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act. Upon information and belief, absent injunctive relief by 

23 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 24 of 28 PageID #: 24 

this Court, Defendants are likely to continue to injure consumers and harm the public interest. 

COUNT THREE 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Violations 

66. Paragraphs 1 through 66 are incorporated as if set forth herein. 

67. Defendants’ Earth Tea products are drugs within the meaning of the FDCA, 

because they are in intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of 

disease in man. According to Defendants’ statements about Earth Tea and their promotion, 

advertising, and labeling of the Earth Tea product, including but not limited to the websites 

b4bearthteallc.com and b4bcorp.com and postings on TikTok, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube, 

Earth Tea is intended to be used in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of 

COVID-19 in man. 

68. Earth Tea is not generally recognized as safe and effective for its intended uses, 

because there are no published adequate and well-controlled clinical studies demonstrating that 

Earth Tea is generally recognized as safe and effective for its intended uses, nor is it the subject 

of safety investigations resulting in such recognition, nor has it been used for a material extent or 

time under such conditions. Therefore, Earth Tea is a new drug within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 321(p). 

69. A drug that is a “new drug” within the meaning of the FDCA is prohibited from 

being introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce unless FDA has 

approved NDA or ANDA for that drug, or the drug is exempt from approval. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 

355(a), (b), (i), and (j). 

70. FDA has received no new drug applications or abbreviated new drug applications, 

24 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 25 of 28 PageID #: 25 

or investigational new drug applications for Defendants’ Earth Tea. Defendants’ products are 

therefore unapproved new drugs within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. §355(a) and are not exempt 

from the FDCA’s approval requirements for new drugs. 

71. Defendants violate 21 U.S.C. § 331(d) by introducing or delivering for 

introduction, or causing to be introduced or delivered for introduction, into interstate commerce 

new drugs, as defined by 21 U.S.C. §321(p), that are neither approved pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 

§355(a) nor exempt from approval. 

72. Upon information and belief, Defendants have caused the distribution of Earth 

Tea products nationwide, including, but not limited to, shipment of Earth Tea products from 

New York to Virginia. Such shipment constitutes the introduction or delivery for introduction of 

unapproved new drugs into interstate commerce under 21 U.S.C. § 331(d). 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

73. WHEREFORE, the United States, pursuant to Sections 5(a)(1), 5(m)(1)(A), 

13(b), 16(a)(1), and 19 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a)(1), 45(m)(1)(A), 52, 53(b), 56(a)(1), 

and 57b, the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182, Title 

XIV, Section 1401(c)(2)(A) of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. § 

332(a), and the Court’s own equitable powers, requests that the Court: 

A. Enter a permanent injunction to prevent future violations of the FTC Act, the 

COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, and the FDCA by the Defendants; 

B. Award such relief pursuant to Section 19 of the FCT Act as the Court finds 

necessary to redress injury to consumers resulting from Defendants’ violations of Section 5 of 

the FTC Act pursuant to the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act, including rescission or 

25 
Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 26 of 28 PageID #: 26 

reformation of contracts, the refund of money or return of property, the payment of damages, 

and public notification respecting the unfair or deceptive act or practice; 

C. Award Plaintiff monetary civil penalties from Defendants for every violation of 

the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act alleged in this Complaint; 

D. Permanently restrain and enjoin, under 21 U.S.C. § 332(a), Defendants, and 

each and all of their directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, attorneys, 

successors, and assigns, and any and all persons in active concert or participation with any of 

them, from directly or indirectly violating the FDCA, 21 U.S.C. § 331(d), by introducing or 

delivering, or causing to be introduced or delivered, into interstate commerce unapproved new 

drugs. 

E. Permanently restrain and enjoin, under 21 U.S.C. § 332(a), Defendants, and 

each and all of their directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, attorneys, 

successors, and assigns, and any and all persons in active concert or participation with any of 

them, from directly or indirectly violating the FDCA in any way, including by introducing or 

delivering for introduction, or causing to be introduced or delivered for introduction, into 

interstate commerce any drug, including but not limited to the Earth Tea products and any 

product labeled similarly to such products and containing the same active ingredients, unless 

and until an approved NDA, ANDA, or an IND application Defendants filed pursuant to 21 

U.S.C. § 355(b), (j), or (i), is in effect for such drugs, or Defendants have removed all 

statements or information from their product labels, labeling, promotional materials, websites 

owned or controlled by or related to any Defendant, and in any other media that cause any of 

Defendants’ products to be drugs within the meaning of the FDCA. 

F. Order that FDA be authorized to inspect Defendants’ place(s) of business and 

26 
 

___________________________ 

Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 27 of 28 PageID #: 27 

all records relating to the receipt, manufacture, processing, packing, labeling, holding, and 

distribution of any of Defendants’ products to ensure continuing compliance with the terms of 

the injunction and the FDCA, the costs of such inspections to be borne by Defendants at the 

rates prevailing at the time the inspections are accomplished; and 

G. Award Plaintiff the costs of bringing this action, as well as such other and 

additional relief as the Court determines to be just and proper. 

Dated: 

FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 

BREON PEACE BRIAN M. BOYNTON 

United States Attorney Acting Assistant Attorney General 

Digitally signed by MICHAEL MICHAEL BLUME 

BLUME Date: 2022.03.03 10:07:26 ARUN G. RAO -05'00' Deputy Assistant Attorney General MICHAEL S. BLUME 

Assistant United States Attorney GUSTAV W. EYLER 

United States Attorney’s Office Director 

271 Cadman Plaza East, 7th Floor Consumer Protection Branch 

Brooklyn, New York 11201 LISA K. HSIAO Telephone: (718) 254-6479 Assistant Director Email: Michael.Blume@usdoj.gov Consumer Protection Branch 

/s/

JAMES T. NELSON 

Senior Trial Attorney

ZACHARY A. DIETERT 

Trial Attorney 

Consumer Protection Branch 

U.S. Department of Justice 

450 5th Street, NW, Suite 6400-S 

Washington, DC 20001

Telephone (Nelson): (202) 616-2376

Telephone (Dietert): (202) 616-9027

Facsimile: (202) 514-8742 

Email: James.Nelson2@usdoj.gov 

Email: Zachary.A.Dietert@usdoj.gov 

Of Counsel: 

ROBERT VAN SOMEREN GREVE 

27 
 

Case 1:22-cv-01159 Document 1 Filed 03/03/22 Page 28 of 28 PageID #: 28 

Attorney 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Mailstop CC-5201 

Washington, DC 20850 

Telephone: (202) 326-2523 

Email: rvansomerengreve@ftc.gov 

MARK RAZA 

Chief Counsel 

Food and Drug Division 

PERHAM GORJI 

Deputy Chief Counsel for Litigation 

MICHAEL SHANE 

Senior Counsel 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Food and Drug Administration 

10903 New Hampshire Avenue 

Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002 

Telephone: 301-796-8593 

Email: Michael.Shane@fda.hhs.gov 

28