D. Colo. · No. 1:26-cv-03473
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lentiful, LLCsource ↗ filed by Good Gustafson Aumais LLP · Judge Timothy P O'Hara · No. 1:26-cv-03473 · 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $87.50M–$436M ▾No closely analogous false-advertising rulings in the dataset; comparables span unrelated theories (data breach, wage/hour, insurance) with mixed survival rates, offering little direct guidance. Cetorelli shows deceptive-practices claims can survive and yield treble damages when facts are clear, but that involved a contractor, not food labeling. Comparable settlements $87.50M–$436M median $90M · n=10 Toyota Industries $436M · Premier Nutrition $90M · IM Mastery Academy $90M Per member (realized): ~$20 median · $20–$20 (n=1) Comparable verdict: Papaya $420M · Vital Pharmaceutical $293M Key precedent: Cetorelli v. Duell Action Builders - shows consumer-protection deceptive practice claims can survive and support enhanced damages when misrepresentation is well-pled. Main risk: Small, low-revenue DTC brand may lack financial exposure to justify large settlement; dismissal risk similar to standing/pleading failures seen in Hernandez-Castrodad and Cocom. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $30K–$625K Extremely thin comparable set for false advertising theory; class size and settlement figures are rough extrapolations from a niche small-brand web footprint, not verified sales data. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 7 verdicts | Filing | False Advertising | D. Colo. | 2026-07-30 | $87.50M–$436M comparable settlements |