CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Lee A. Cirsch (SBN 227668)

Lee.Cirsch@capstonelawyers.com

Robert K. Friedl (SBN 134947)

Robert.Friedl@capstonelawyers.com

Trisha K. Monesi (SBN 303512)

Trisha.Monesi@capstonelawyers.com

Capstone Law APC

1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000

Los Angeles, California 90067

Telephone: (310) 556-4811

Facsimile: (310) 943-0396

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Garret Shank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARRET SHANK, individually, and on 

behalf of other members of the general 

public similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PRESIDIO BRANDS, INC., a Delaware 

corporation,

Defendant.

Case No.: 

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR:

(1) Violations of California’s Consumers

Legal Remedies Act

(2) Violation of Unfair Competition Law, 

California Business & Professions Code 

§ 17200 et seq.

(3) Violation of False Advertising Law, 

California Business & Professions Code 

§ 17500 

(4) Negligent Misrepresentation

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 1 of 26
Page 1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff Garret Shank (“Plaintiff”) brings this action for himself and on behalf 

of all persons in the United States who, at any time since four years prior to the filing of this 

complaint, purchased any Every Man Jack brand product containing artificially-processed and 

synthetic ingredients and labeled or marketed as “naturally derived” (“EMJ Products”)1

designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, and sold by Presidio Brands, Inc. (“Presidio” 

or “Defendant”). .

2. This case arises out of the false, misleading, and deceptive marketing practices 

of Defendant’s Every Man Jack products. Defendant’s advertising and labeling strategy 

focuses on claims that its Every Man Jack products are all-natural, naturally-derived, nontoxic, and exceptionally safe for consumers. However, EMJ Products, in fact, contain several 

synthetic ingredients that are not natural or naturally derived, as portrayed by Defendant. 

Further, as described in detail below, many of the synthetic2ingredients used in EMJ Products 

are hazardous or toxic and can cause adverse reactions.

3. Presidio has so labeled its products in order to capture the growing market of 

health conscious consumers, including Plaintiff and other Class Members. By deceiving 

consumers about the nature, quality, and/or ingredients of its products, Presidio is able to 

command a premium price, increasing consumers’ willingness to pay and reduce the market 

share of competing products, thereby increasing its own sales and profits.

4. Reasonable consumers must, and do, rely on Presidio’s overall marketing, 

including, without limitation, product advertisements, labels, displays, and packaging, in 

 

1 On information and belief, the following EMJ products contain synthetic ingredients: 

2-in-1 body + face wash; 2-in-1 body wash; 2-in-1 shampoo + conditioner; 2-in-1 thickening 

shampoo; body bar; body wash; daily conditioner; deodorant; eye cream; face lotion with faily 

sun protection; face lotion; face moisturizer; face shield; fiber cream; pomade; shave cream 

premium; shave cream; shave gel; styling gel; and thickening grooming cream.

2

“The term ‘synthetic’ means a substance that is formulated or manufactured by a 

chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally 

occurring plant, animal, or mineral sources, except that such term shall not apply to 

substances created by naturally occurring biological processes. 7 U.S.C. § 6502(21). 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 2 of 26
Page 2

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

determining whether to purchase EMJ Products. For example, as shown below, the Every 

Man Jack website features a wood-grain background and wholly focuses on a large image of a 

forest and the word “naturally”: 

The Every Man Jack products themselves further portray the same earthy, non-toxic, 

and natural marketing claims and implications as its website. Below are examples of the front 

packaging and labeling of the Every Man Jack 2-in-1 Sandalwood Body Wash:

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 3 of 26
Page 3

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5. On information and belief, every EMJ Product at issue in this complaint have 

the same or substantially similar product packaging that contain the same or substantially 

similar deceptive claims employed by Presidio.

6. If Plaintiff and Class Members knew that the EMJ Products were not natural or 

contained synthetic, artificially-processed ingredients, Plaintiff and Class Members would not 

have purchased the EMJ Products or would have paid less for them. 

7. By employing the labeling and marketing tactics illustrated above, Presidio 

intends for consumers to rely on its visual and actual representations, and hundreds of 

thousands of reasonable consumers did in fact so rely. Because Presidio will not notify Class 

Members that the EMJ Products in fact contain synthetic, artificial ingredients, Plaintiff and 

Class Members (as well as members of the general public) remain subject to Presidio’s 

deceptive advertising.

8. As a result of their reliance on Defendant’s representations, consumers have 

suffered an ascertainable loss of money, including, but not limited to, out of pocket costs 

incurred in purchasing over-valued EMJ Products. Further, as a result of its deceptive 

marketing and unfair competition with other similar manufacturers and brands, Presidio 

realized sizable profits.

PARTIES

PLAINTIFF GARRET SHANK

9. Plaintiff Garret Shank is a California citizen who resides in Los Angeles, 

California. During the class period alleged herein, Plaintiff purchased several EMJ Products

on numerous occasions from various Target stores in Los Angeles County. Plaintiff’s 

purchases include, without limitation, Every Man Jack Face Lotion, Every Man Jack Face 

Lotion with SPF, Every Man Jack Face Scrub, and Every Man Jack Face Wash. 

10. Plaintiff purchased EMJ products in reliance on Presidio’s marketing of the 

products including the claims and product information on the Every Man Jack website, in 

Men’s Health magazine, and on the products’ packaging and labeling. In deciding to purchase 

EMJ Products, Plaintiff saw, relied upon, and reasonably believed that the EMJ Products only 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 4 of 26
Page 4

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

contained ingredients that are natural because of Presidio’s representations including, without 

limitation, the repeated and highlighted use of the phrase “naturally derived”, depictions of 

plants and trees, listing of other earth-friendly and health-conscious features of the product 

(e.g. product bottles made with at least 50% post-consumer recycled plastic and certain 

products being gluten free), and the wood-grain packaging. Purchasing natural, non-toxic, 

non-synthetic and environmentally-friendly products is important to Plaintiff and Defendant’s 

representations were material to Plaintiff in his decision to purchase EMJ Products.

11. If Plaintiff had known at the time of purchase that these products contained 

synthetic and hazardous ingredients, he would not have purchased the EMJ Products or would 

have paid less for them. 

DEFENDANT

12. Defendant Presidio Brands, Inc. is a corporation organized and in existence 

under the laws of the State of Delaware and is registered to do business in the State of 

California. Presidio Brands, Inc.’s corporate headquarters and principal place of business are 

located at 500 Tamal Plaza, Suite 505, Corte Madera, California 94925. Presidio Brands, Inc. 

designs, tests, manufactures, markets, distributes, and sells Every Man Jack products 

nationwide and in California. Every Man Jack is Presidio Brands, Inc.’s men’s personal 

care/hygiene brand. 

13. At all relevant times, Defendant was and is engaged in the business of 

designing, testing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling personal care/hygiene 

products in Los Angeles County and throughout the United States of America. 

JURISDICTION

14. This is a class action.

15. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1331 because this action arises under the Constitution or laws of the United States and the 

Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) and (6), in that, as to each Class defined 

herein:

a. the matter in controversy exceeds $5,000,000.00, exclusive of interest 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 5 of 26
Page 5

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

and costs;

b. this is a class action involving 100 or more class members; and

c. this is a class action in which at least one member of the Plaintiff class 

is a citizen of a State different from at least one Defendant.

16. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant, which have at least 

minimum contacts with the State of California because they have conducted business there 

and have availed themselves of California’s markets through the advertising, manufacturing, 

distribution, and sales of its EMJ Products. 

VENUE

17. Presidio Brands, Inc. Uber, through its advertising, manufacturing, distribution, 

and sales of their EMJ Products has established sufficient contacts in this district such that 

personal jurisdiction is appropriate. Defendant is deemed to reside in this district pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(a).

18. Further, Defendant is headquartered here and/or has conducted business here 

and has availed itself of California’s markets through its advertising, manufacturing,

distribution, and sales of its EMJ Products. marketing, sale, and administration of ride-sharing 

services. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a).

19. Additionally, Plaintiff Garret Shank’s Declaration, as required under California 

Civil Code section 1780(d), but not pursuant to Erie and federal procedural rules, reflects that 

a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims alleged herein occurred, 

or a substantial part of property that is the subject of this action, is situated in Marin County, 

California. It is attached as Exhibit 1.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

20. A rapidly-growing segment of consumers value natural and plant-based 

products for many reasons, including to address health concerns (e.g., avoiding skin irritation 

and diseases such as cancer) and to help the environment. To capture this growing market, 

and to gain an advantage over competitors, Presidio designs, markets, distributes, and sells its 

Every Man Jack brand products claiming that the products contain only “naturally derived” 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 6 of 26
Page 6

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ingredients. These claims are coupled with images of plants and forests intended to give the 

impression that its products’ ingredients are all-natural and plant-based, and do not contain 

synthetic, artificial, or toxic ingredients. 

21. Presidio further cultivates the Every Man Jack image as a natural, plant-based, 

non-synthetic, healthy and eco-friendly brand through its wood-grain packaging, plant 

imagery, and simplistic labeling as well as Presidio’s “naturally”, “natural”, and “naturallyderived” statements regarding its ingredients that are found repeatedly throughout the Every 

Man Jack website, in magazine advertisements and articles, and on the EMJ Product labels. 

22. Defendant’s representations that its EMJ Products contain only natural and 

naturally derived ingredients are false, misleading, and deceptive because the EMJ Products 

contain multiple ingredients that are synthetic and artificial. Specifically, EMJ Products 

contain the following, non-exhaustive, list of synthetic and artificial ingredients:

Synthetic and Artificial Ingredient(s) EMJ Product(s)

ALUMINUM HYDROXIDE

(synthetic polymer)

Face Shield

AMODIMETHICONE

(synthetic polymer)

2-in-1 Body Wash; 

Daily Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Thickening Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo + Conditioner; 

Daily Shampoo

CETYL DIMETHICONE (synthetic 

polymer)

Face Lotion SPF 15

COCAMIDOPROPYL BETAINE

(synthetic surfactant)

2-in-1 Body Wash; 

2-in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

Daily Shampoo; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint; 

Face Wash Signature Mint; 

Daily Shampoo Sandalwood; 

Face Wash Skin Clearing

COCAMIDOPROPYLAMINE OXIDE

(synthetic surfactant)

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; 

Body Wash Cedarwood; 

Body Wash Sandalwood; 

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

DIMETHICONE (synthetic polymer) Face Lotion; 

Face Moisturizer Age Defying; 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 7 of 26
Page 7

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Eye Cream Age Defying; 

Daily Conditioner

DIMETHICONE PEG/PPG-20/23 

BENZOATE (synthetic polymer)

Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free

DIMETHICONE PEG-8 BENZOATE

(synthetic polymer)

Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint

ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN (synthetic 

glyceryl)

Face Lotion SPF 15; 

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; 

2-in-1 Body Wash; 

Body Wash Cedarwood; 

Shave Gel Sandalwood; 

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Face Lotion Sandalwood; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Face Shield; 

Body Defense Spray; 

Body Wash Sandalwood; 

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Face Moisturizer Age Defying; 

Face Lotion; 

Daily Shampoo Sandalwood; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint; 

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

FRAGRANCE/PARFUM (synthetic 

compound)

Deodorant Fresh Scent; 

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; Shave 

Gel Signature Mint; 2-in-1 Body 

Wash; Body Wash Cedarwood; Shave 

Gel Sandalwood; Face Lotion 

Sandalwood; Face Lotion Signature 

Mint; Deodorant Eucalyptus Mint; 2-

in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 2-in-1 

Body + Face Wash; Body Wash 

Sandalwood; Body Wash Signature 

Mint; Deodorant Cedarwood; Daily 

Shampoo; Daily Conditioner; 2-in-1 

Thickening Shampoo; 2-in-1 Daily 

Shampoo + Conditioner; Face Scrub 

Signature Mint; Face Wash Signature 

Mint; Deodorant Sandalwood; 

Deodorant Citrus; Deodorant 

Signature Mint; Daily Shampoo 

Sandalwood; Thickening Grooming 

Cream; Shave Cream Premium Shave; 

Pomade; Shave Cream Signature 

Mint; Body Wash Citrus Scrub

GLYCERYL ESTERS (synthetic 

surfactant)

Face Lotion SPF 15; 

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 8 of 26
Page 8

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Face Lotion Sandalwood; 

Face Moisturizer Age Defying; 

Eye Cream Age Defying; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint; 

Face Scrub Skin Clearing

HYDROGEN DIMETHICONE

(synthetic polymer)

Face Shield

HYDROGENATED POLYDECENE

(synthetic polymer)

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint

HYDROXYETHYLCELLULOSE 

(synthetic polymer)

Shave Gel Signature Mint;

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Daily Conditioner

AMIDOPROPYL BETAINES 

(synthetic surfactant)

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; 

Body Wash Cedarwood

PEG/PPG-4/12 DIMETHICONE 

(synthetic polymer)

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

2-in-1 Thickening Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo + Conditioner

PEG-12 DIMETHICONE (synthetic 

polymer)

Daily Shampoo

PEG-100 STEARATE (synthetic 

polymer)

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint

PEG-150 DISTEARATE (synthetic 

polymer)

2-in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

2-in-1 Thickening Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo + Conditioner

PHENOXYETHANOL (synthetic 

preservative)

Face Lotion SPF 15; 

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; 

Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Body Wash Cedarwood; 

Shave Gel Sandalwood; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Face Lotion Sandalwood; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Face Shield; 

2-in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

Body Wash Sandalwood; 

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Face Moisturizer Age Defying; 

Face Lotion; Daily Shampoo; 

Daily Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Thickening Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo + Conditioner; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint; 

Face Scrub Skin Clearing; 

Shave Cream Premium Shave; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint; 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 9 of 26
Page 9

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

POLYBUTENE (synthetic polymer) Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint

POLYCATIONIC POLYMERS 

(synthetic polymers)

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; Body 

Wash Cedarwood; 

2-in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

Body Wash Sandalwood;

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Daily Shampoo; 2-in-1 Thickening 

Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo; 

Daily Shampoo Sandalwood; 

Thickening Grooming Cream; 

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

POLYSORBATES (synthetic 

surfactant)

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Face Lotion; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint

POTASSIUM SORBATE (synthetic 

preservative)

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint; 

2-in-1 Body Wash; 

Body Wash Cedarwood; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Body Wash Sandalwood; 

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Face Lotion; 

Face Wash Signature Mint; 

Face Wash Skin Clearing; 

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

SODIUM BENZOATE (synthetic 

preservative)

Body Wash Eucalyptus Mint;

2-in-1 Body Wash; 

Body Wash Cedarwood; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Body Wash Sandalwood; 

Body Wash Signature Mint; 

Face Lotion; 

Face Wash Signature Mint;

Face Wash Skin Clearing; 

Body Wash Citrus Scrub

SODIUM LAURYLGLUCOSIDES 

HYDROXYPROPYLSULFONATE 

(synthetic surfactant) 

2-in1 Body Wash; 

Daily Shampoo Sandalwood

SORBITAN ESTERS (synthetic 

surfactant)

Face Lotion SPF 15; 

Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint; 

Face Lotion

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 10 of 26
Page 10

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

TOCOPHERYL ACETATE (synthetic 

Vitamin E)

Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Face Lotion Signature Mint;

2-in-1 Shampoo + Conditioner; 

2-in-1 Body + Face Wash; 

Face Lotion; 

Eye Cream Age Defying; 

2-in-1 Thickening Shampoo; 

2-in-1 Daily Shampoo + Conditioner; 

Face Scrub Signature Mint; 

TRIETHANOLAMINE Shave Gel Signature Mint; 

Shave Gel Fragrance Free; 

Shave Cream Fragrance Free; 

Fiber Cream; 

Shave Cream Signature Mint

ZINC OXIDE Body Defense Lotion; 

Face Lotion SPF 15; 

Face Shield

23. Presidio knows, or should know, that consumers, like Plaintiff and other Class 

Members, reasonably rely on such representations in forming the belief that the EMJ Products 

do not contain synthetic, artificial or toxic ingredients. However, these representations are 

false, misleading and deceptive because the EMJ Products do contain synthetic, artificial, and 

toxic ingredients, as identified above. Consumers lack the meaningful ability to test or 

independently ascertain or verify whether a product is natural or naturally derived, especially 

at the point of sale. Consumer would not, and could not, know the true nature of products’ 

ingredients merely by reading the ingredients label. 

24. The EMJ Products are thus not natural, naturally derived, or plant-based, and 

labeling them as such is misleading and deceptive. Defendants did not disclose that any of the 

ingredients listed above are synthetic ingredients. 

25. Presidio has concealed the nature, identity, source, and/or method of 

preparation of additional ingredients, which may also be synthetic ingredients. Thus, 

discovery is necessary to uncover the true nature of other ingredients in the EMJ Products.

26. Presidio deceptively and misleadingly concealed, and continues to conceal,

other material facts about the EMJ Products, including:

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 11 of 26
Page 11

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a. The true nature of the EMJ Products’ ingredients;

b. The artificial and synthetic substances and ingredients contained in the 

EMJ products; and

c. The artificial and synthetic processes used to create the ingredients in 

the EMJ Products.

27. The production process Presidio uses for many of its ingredients is known only 

to Defendant and Defendant has not disclosed such information to Plaintiff and the Class 

Members. Further, these facts are not ascertainable and are still not known to Plaintiff, the 

Class members, and reasonable consumers. Presidio’s concealment tolls any applicable 

statute of limitations.

28. To this day, Presidio continues to conceal and suppress the true nature, identity, 

source, and method of production of the ingredients in the EMJ Products.

29. If Plaintiff and Class Members knew that the EMJ Products were not natural or 

contained synthetic, artificially-processed ingredients, Plaintiff and Class Members would not 

have purchased the EMJ Products or would have paid less for them. 

30. By employing the labeling and marketing tactics illustrated above, Presidio 

intends for consumers to rely on its visual and actual representations, and hundreds of 

thousands of reasonable consumers did in fact so rely. Because Presidio will not notify Class 

Members that the EMJ Products in fact contain synthetic, artificial ingredients, Plaintiff and 

Class Members (as well as members of the general public) remain subject to Presidio’s 

deceptive advertising.

31. Presidio knows, or should reasonably know, that consumers prefer natural, 

“naturally derived”, and plant-based products. Presidio knows that consumers will pay a 

premium for these products or would not purchase these products at all unless they were 

natural, “naturally derived”, and/or plant-based, as advertised. Similarly, independent surveys 

confirm that consumers will purchase more natural products than conventional products, and 

will pay a premium for natural products.

32. As a result of their reliance on Defendant’s representations, consumers have 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 12 of 26
Page 12

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

suffered an ascertainable loss of money, including, but not limited to, out of pocket costs 

incurred in purchasing over-valued EMJ Products. Further, as a result of its deceptive 

marketing and unfair competition with other similar manufacturers and brands, Presidio 

realized sizable profits. 

33. As the intended, direct, and proximate result of Presidio’s false, misleading, 

and deceptive representations and omissions, Presidio has been unjustly enriched through 

more sales of Falsely Labeled Products and higher profits at the expense of Plaintiff and the 

Class members. 

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

34. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit as a class action on behalf of himself and all others 

similarly situated as members of the proposed Class pursuant to pursuant to Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure 23(a), 23(b)(2), 23(b)(3), and 23(c)(4). This action satisfies the numerosity, 

commonality, typicality, adequacy, predominance, and superiority requirements of those 

provisions.

35. The Class and Sub Class(es) are defined as:

Nationwide Class: All individuals in the United States who purchased any 

Every Man Jack brand product containing artificially-processed and synthetic 

ingredients and labeled or marketed as “naturally derived”

California Sub-Class: All members of the Nationwide Class who reside in the 

State of California.

CLRA Sub-Class: All members of the California Sub-Class who are 

“consumers” within the meaning of California Civil Code § 1761(d).

36. Excluded from the Class and Sub-Classes are: (1) Defendant, any entity or 

division in which Defendant has a controlling interest, and their legal representatives, officers, 

directors, assigns, and successors; (2) the Judge to whom this case is assigned and the Judge’s 

staff; (3) any Judge sitting in the presiding state and/or federal court system who may hear an 

appeal of any judgment entered; and (4) those persons who have suffered personal injuries as 

a result of the facts alleged herein. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the Class and SubClass definitions if discovery and further investigation reveal that the Class and Sub-Class 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 13 of 26
Page 13

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

should be expanded or otherwise modified.

37. Numerosity: Although the exact number of Class Members is uncertain and 

can only be ascertained through appropriate discovery, the number is great enough such that 

joinder is impracticable. The disposition of the claims of these Class Members in a single 

action will provide substantial benefits to all parties and to the Court. The Class Members are 

readily identifiable from information and records in Defendant’s possession, custody, or 

control.

38. Typicality: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the Class in that 

Plaintiffs, like all Class Members, purchased an EMJ Product containing artificially-processed 

and synthetic ingredients and labeled or marketed as “naturally derived”. The representative 

Plaintiff, like all Class Members, has been damaged by Defendant’s misconduct in that they 

incurred expenses due to their reliance on Defendant’s deceptive representations and 

omissions regarding its EMJ Products, as described throughout this complaint. Furthermore, 

the factual bases of Defendant’s misconduct are common to all Class Members and represent a 

common thread resulting in injury to all Class Members.

39. Commonality: There are numerous questions of law and fact common to 

Plaintiff and the Class that predominate over any question affecting only individual Class 

Members. These common legal and factual issues include the following:

a. Whether Presidio misrepresented and/or failed to disclose material facts

concerning the EMJ Products;

b. Whether Presidio’s conduct was unfair and/or deceptive; 

c. Whether Presidio has a duty to disclose the true nature of its EMJ 

Products’ ingredients;

d. Whether Plaintiff and other Class Members are entitled to equitable 

relief, including but not limited to a preliminary and/or permanent 

injunction;

e. Whether Defendant knew or reasonably should have known of its

deceptive representations and omissions relating to its EMJ Products’ 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 14 of 26
Page 14

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ingredients; and 

f. Whether Defendant is obligated to inform Class Members of their right 

to seek reimbursement for having paid for EMJ Products in reliance on

Defendant’s misrepresentations.

40. Adequate Representation: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the 

interests of the Class Members. Plaintiff has retained attorneys experienced in the prosecution 

of class actions, including consumer and product defect class actions, and Plaintiff intends to 

prosecute this action vigorously.

41. Predominance and Superiority: Plaintiff and Class Members have all suffered 

and will continue to suffer harm and damages as a result of Defendant’s unlawful and 

wrongful conduct. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and 

efficient adjudication of the controversy. Absent a class action, most Class Members would 

likely find the cost of litigating their claims prohibitively high and would therefore have no 

effective remedy at law. Because of the relatively small size of the individual Class 

Members’ claims, it is likely that only a few Class Members could afford to seek legal redress 

for Defendant’s misconduct. Absent a class action, Class Members will continue to incur 

damages, and Defendant’s misconduct will continue without remedy. Class treatment of 

common questions of law and fact would also be a superior method to multiple individual 

actions or piecemeal litigation in that class treatment will conserve the resources of the courts 

and the litigants, and will promote consistency and efficiency of adjudication.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code § 

1750, et seq.,)

42. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

43. Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of himself and on behalf of the 

members of the CLRA Sub-Class. 

44. Defendant is a “person” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(c).

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 15 of 26
Page 15

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

45. Plaintiff and CLRA Sub-Class Members are “consumers” within the meaning 

of California Civil Code § 1761(d) because they bought the EMJ Products for personal, 

family, or household purposes. 

46. By failing to disclose and concealing the true and actual nature of the EMJ 

Products from Plaintiff and prospective Class Members, Defendant violated California Civil 

Code § 1770(a), as it represented that the EMJ Products had characteristics and benefits that 

they do not have, represented that the EMJ Products were of a particular standard, quality, or 

grade when they were of another, and advertised the EMJ Products with the intent not to sell 

them as advertised. See Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1770(a)(5)(7) & (9). 

47. Defendant’s unfair and deceptive acts or practices occurred repeatedly in 

Defendant’s trade or business and were capable of deceiving a substantial portion of the 

purchasing public. 

48. Defendant knew the EMJ Products did not possess the characteristics and 

benefits as represented and were not of the particular standard, quality or grade as represented. 

49. As a result of their reliance on Defendant’s representations and omissions, 

Class Members suffered an ascertainable loss of money, property, and/or value of their EMJ 

Products. 

50. Defendant was under a duty to Plaintiff and Class Members to disclose the true 

and actual nature of the EMJ Products’ ingredients because:

a. Defendant was in a superior position to know the true state of facts 

about the ingredients in the EMJ Products;

b. Plaintiff and Class Members could not reasonably have been expected to 

learn or discover the true nature of the ingredients in the EMJ Products 

at the time of purchase and thereafter; and

c. Defendant knew that Plaintiff and Class Members could not reasonably

have been expected to learn of or discover the true nature of the EMJ 

Products’ ingredients.

51. In failing to disclose and misrepresenting the true nature and source of the EMJ 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 16 of 26
Page 16

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Products’ ingredients, Defendant knowingly and intentionally concealed material facts and 

breached its duty not to do so.

52. The facts Defendant concealed from or misrepresented to Plaintiff and Class 

Members are material in that a reasonable consumer would have considered them to be 

important in deciding whether to purchase the EMJ Products or pay less. If Plaintiff and Class 

Members had known that the EMJ Products’ ingredients were synthetic, artificial, and toxic, 

they would not have purchased the EMJ Products or would have paid less for them.

53. Plaintiff and Class Members are reasonable consumers who expect 

manufacturers, like Presidio, to provide accurate and truthful representations regarding the 

synthetic and artificial ingredients used in their products. Further, reasonable consumers, like 

Plaintiff, rely on the representations made by manufacturers regarding products’ ingredients in 

determining whether to purchase the particular products and consider that information 

important to their purchase decision. 

54. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s unfair methods of competition 

and/or unfair and deceptive practices, Plaintiff and the Class have suffered and will continue 

to suffer actual damages.

55. Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to equitable relief.

56. Plaintiff provided Defendant with notice of its violations of the CLRA pursuant 

to California Civil Code § 1782(a). Defendant failed to provide appropriate relief for its 

violations of the CLRA within 30 days. Therefore, Plaintiff seeks monetary, compensatory, 

and punitive damages, in addition to injunctive and equitable relief. 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Violation of California Business & Professions Code § 17500 et seq.)

57. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in each and every 

paragraph of this Complaint.

58. Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of himself and on behalf of the 

Nationwide Class, or in the alternative, on behalf of the California Sub-Class.

59. California Business & Professions Code § 17500 prohibits unfair, deceptive, 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 17 of 26
Page 17

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

untrue, and misleading advertising in connection with the disposal of personal property 

(among other things), including, without limitation, false statements as to the use, worth, 

benefits, or characteristics of the property.

60. Defendant has committed acts of untrue and misleading advertising by 

engaging in false representations as to the synthetic and artificial ingredients used in its EMJ 

Products. In addition, Defendant made such untrue or misleading advertisements with the 

intent to dispose of said merchandise. 

61. Presidio knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that 

these representations were misleading and deceptive.

62. The falsely advertised synthetic and artificial ingredients of the EMJ Products 

Seats was, and continues to be, likely to deceive members of the public.

63. As a result of their reliance on Defendant’s misrepresentations and omissions, 

Class Members suffered an ascertainable loss of money, property, and/or value of their EMJ 

Products. 

64. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s unfair and deceptive practices, 

Plaintiff and the Class have suffered and will continue to suffer actual damages.

65. Presidio has been unjustly enriched and should be required to make restitution 

to Plaintiff and the Class. Pursuant to § 17535 of the Business & Professions Code, Plaintiff 

and Class Members are entitled to an order of this Court enjoining such future conduct on the 

part of Presidio, and such other orders and judgments which may be necessary to disgorge 

Presidio’s ill-gotten gains and restore to any person in interest any money paid for its EMJ 

Products as a result of the wrongful conduct of Presidio.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Violation of California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.)

66. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in each and every 

paragraph of this Complaint.

67. Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of himself and on behalf of the 

Nationwide Class, or in the alternative, on behalf of himself and on behalf of the California 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 18 of 26
Page 18

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Sub-Class.

68. As a result of their reliance on Defendant’s misrepresentations and omissions,

Class Members suffered an ascertainable loss of money, property, and/or value of their EMJ 

Products.

69. California Business & Professions Code § 17200 prohibits acts of “unfair 

competition,” including any “unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice” and 

“unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising.”

70. Plaintiff and Class Members are reasonable consumers who expect 

manufacturers, like Presidio, to provide accurate and truthful representations regarding the 

synthetic and artificial ingredients used in their products. Further, reasonable consumers, like 

Plaintiff, rely on the representations made by manufacturers regarding products’ ingredients in 

determining whether to purchase the particular products and consider that information 

important to their purchase decision. 

71. In failing to disclose and actively misrepresenting the actual nature and source 

of the ingredients used in the EMJ Products, Defendant has knowingly and intentionally 

concealed material facts and breached its duty not to do so.

72. Defendant was under a duty to Plaintiff and Class Members to disclose the 

actual nature and source of the ingredients used in the EMJ Products, and other omitted or 

misrepresented facts alleged herein, because:

a. Defendant was in a superior position to know the true nature and 

sources of the EMJ Products’ ingredients; 

b. Defendant made partial representations about the nature and sources of 

the EMJ Products’ ingredients without revealing the material 

information needed to determine whether to purchase; and

c. Defendant actively concealed the actual nature and sources of the EMJ 

Products’ ingredients from Plaintiff and the Class. 

73. The facts Defendant concealed from or misrepresented to Plaintiff and Class 

Members are material in that a reasonable consumer would have considered them to be 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 19 of 26
Page 19

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

important in deciding whether to purchase the EMJ Products or pay less. If Plaintiff and Class 

Members had known that the EMJ Products’ ingredients were synthetic, artificial, and toxic, 

they would not have purchased the EMJ Products or would have paid less for them.

74. Defendant’s conduct was and is likely to deceive consumers.

75. Defendant’s acts, conduct and practices were unlawful, in that they constituted:

a. Violations of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act; and

b. Violations of California’s False Advertising Law. 

76. By its conduct, Defendant has engaged in unfair competition and unlawful, 

unfair, and fraudulent business practices.

77. Defendant’s unfair or deceptive acts or practices occurred repeatedly in 

Defendant’s trade or business, and were capable of deceiving a substantial portion of the 

purchasing public.

78. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s unfair and deceptive practices, 

Plaintiff and the Class have suffered and will continue to suffer actual damages.

79. Defendant has been unjustly enriched and should be required to make 

restitution to Plaintiff and the Class pursuant to §§ 17203 and 17204 of the Business & 

Professions Code.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Negligent Misrepresentation)

80. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

81. Presidio represented to Plaintiff and members of the Class that those important 

facts set above were true.

82. These representations were not true.

83. Presidio had no reasonable grounds for believing the representations were true 

when it made them.

84. Presidio intended that Plaintiff and members of the Class rely on these 

representations.

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 20 of 26
Page 20

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

85. Plaintiff and members of the Class reasonably relied on Presidio’s

representations.

86. Defendant’s representations were material to Plaintiff’s decision to purchase 

the EMJ Products and Plaintiff and members of the Class were harmed by Defendant’s 

misrepresentations.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

87. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself, and all others similarly situated, requests the 

Court to enter judgment against Defendant, as follows:

a. An order certifying the proposed Class and Sub-Classes, designating 

Plaintiff as named representative of the Class, and designating the 

undersigned as Class Counsel;

b. An order enjoining Defendant from further deceptive advertising, sales, 

and other business practices with respect to its representations regarding 

the EMJ Products; 

c. A declaration requiring Defendant to comply with the various 

provisions of California’s False Advertising Law and CLRA alleged 

herein and to make all the required representations;

d. An award to Plaintiff and the Class for compensatory, exemplary, and 

statutory damages, including interest, in an amount to be proven at trial; 

e. A declaration that Defendant must disgorge, for the benefit of the Class, 

all or part of the ill-gotten profits it received from the sale of its EMJ 

Products, or make full restitution to Plaintiff and Class Members;

f. An award of attorneys’ fees and costs, as allowed by law;

g. An award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to California Code of 

Civil Procedure § 1021.5;

h. An award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, as provided by 

law;

i. Leave to amend the Complaint to conform to the evidence produced at 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 21 of 26
Page 21

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

trial; and

j. Such other relief as may be appropriate under the circumstances.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

88. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff demands a trial by 

jury of any and all issues in this action so triable. 

Dated: January 17, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

Capstone Law APC

By: /s/ Lee A. Cirsch

Lee A. Cirsch

Robert K. Friedl

Trisha K. Monesi

Attorneys for Plaintiff Garrett Shank 

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 22 of 26
EXHIBIT 1

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 23 of 26
DocuSign Envelope ID: EFCFD11E-0EBC-4619-8DA7-0FDE1D36734D Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 24 of 26
DocuSign Envelope ID: EFCFD11E-0EBC-4619-8DA7-0FDE1D36734D Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 25 of 26
DocuSign Envelope ID: EFCFD11E-0EBC-4619-8DA7-0FDE1D36734D

12

Case 4:17-cv-00232-DMR Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 26 of 26