United States v. Article Consisting of Boxes More or Less Labeled "Line Away Temporary Wrinkle Smoother Coty"’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In contrast, the promotional material is, for the most part, elaboration of the implications inherent in the description of Line Away as an “amazing protein lotion.” Since protein is a principal nutrient, advertising so structured as to emphasize the protein content of the product suggests that the lotion nourishes the skin. In line with this basic suggestion, the repeated statements that Line Away is made in a “pharmaceutical laboratory” and packaged under “biologically aseptic conditions” imply that the product itself is a pharmaceutical. Characterizing the lotion as “super-active” and “amazing”, creating a “tingling sensation” when “at work”, “tightening” the skin and “discouraging new wrinkles from forming” strongly reinforces the impression that this is a therapeutic product, the protein content of which has a tonic or otherwise wholesome physiological effect upon the skin itself. 415 F.2d at 372.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 331 F. Supp. 912 - United States v. ARTICLE OF DRUG, ETC.

2. “regardless of the actual physical effect of a product, it will be deemed a drug if the labeling, including separate promotional claims, attributes characteristics to the product that would bring it within the Act's definition.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Pets Smellfree, Inc.