Judge Lindsay Jenkins, who was nominated by President Biden to the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois, rejected a motion to dismiss and allowed a class action against an acne treatment manufacturer to go forward. The complaint contends that an ingredient in the product degrades into benzene, which can cause cancer. The September 2024 decision was in Williams v Galderma Laboratories.
What happened in this case? ,
In 2023, Skylar Williams purchased Differin cleanser, an acne treatment product made and sold by Galderma Laboratories. She saw no warning labels on the product. In March 2024, an independent laboratory released findings showing that a key ingredient in Differin, called BPO, “degrades into benzene, a known carcinogen” at high temperatures.
On behalf of herself and other purchasers of Differin, Williams filed a class action against the corporation, She contended that Galderma failed to comply with good manufacturing practices as recognized by the FDA, that Differin is accordingly misbranded and adulterated in violation of both federal and state law, that Galderma’s failure to disclose and other conduct constitute “unfair and deceptive practices” under state statutes, including the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“ICFA”), and that the company was unjustly enriched through sale of the product. Galderma moved to dismiss the case as a matter of law, primarily contending that Williams’ claims are preempted by federal law, which it complies with.
How did Judge Jenkins Rule and Why is it Important?
Judge Jenkins ruled that the corporation’s pre-emption claims did not warrant dismissal of the lawsuit, which should go forward. She explained that a lawsuit like this one could proceed where state law imposes requirements that are “parallel” to federal mandates. In this case, she went on, the ICFA mandates good manufacturing practices in a way that is “parallel’ to federal law, so the case for violation of the state law can continue. More specifically, she wrote, the complaint alleged that Galderma failed to comply with applicable testing and safety requirements “given the known link between BPO and benzene.” Although Jenkins held that some of Williams’ theories, like failure to warn, were pre-empted by federal law, she ruled that the alleged facts “plausibly suggest” that Williams and other class members are entitled to relief under ICFA and other state consumer protection laws and under the theory of unjust enrichment.
Judge Jenkins’ opinion is obviously important to Skylar Williams and other class members, who can now seek damages and justice from the corporation. The ruling may also be important in other cases where corporate defendants try to avoid liability based on a federal pre-emption theory, particularly in the Seventh Circuit, which includes Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana. In addition, the decision serves as a reminder of the importance of promptly confirming fair-minded judges to our federal courts.