Daily Disposable Lawsuit

CaptainKremen · #1 (**permalink**) 07-22-2008, 08:46 AM

It seems there are people out there who think that Johnson & Johnson is "scamming" people by taking contact lenses that you only have to replace once a month, putting them in a different box with a different name on it and saying that the ones in the new box need to be replaced every day.

Strange thing is, I did a Google search for any kind of evidence of legal action against J & J on this issue and didn't find a trace. Personally, I think someone is just making stuff up. Can anyone give me more information?

Rossi · #2 (**permalink**) 08-10-2008, 03:21 PM

yeah the fact is there made on a different production line using a different technique allow the base material is the same the lens materials are different so people wouldn't stand a chance in a lawsuit

eyecaramba · #3 (**permalink**) 08-12-2008, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rossi

yeah the fact is there made on a different production line using a different technique allow the base material is the same the lens materials are different so people wouldn't stand a chance in a lawsuit

Thank you, Rossi. I get a little tired of people screaming "scam!" all over the place before they get their facts straight. Thank you for doing your homework. Looks like Johnson & Johnson isn't scamming anybody.

I love Lens 101.

CaptainKremen · #4 (**permalink**) 10-08-2009, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyecaramba

Thank you, Rossi. I get a little tired of people screaming "scam!" all over the place before they get their facts straight. Thank you for doing your homework. Looks like Johnson & Johnson isn't scamming anybody.

I love Lens 101.

I'm with you, eyecaramba. It's incredible how often I get an email intended to either anger me or scare me, but after five minutes of research, I usually reply with some variation of "It's all right, folks. Nothing to see here."

lurker2010 · #5 (**permalink**) 01-25-2010, 12:40 PM

Both Vistakon (J&J) and B&L were sued in the mid 90s. They were selling the same lens at different prices,different quantities with different care instructions. Yes, at one time, the regular Accuvue and One Day Accuvue was the identical lens. At one time B&L was selling the same lense for different wearing periods.

I think at least one mfg started selling their vial (one year) lens in a 4 pack for quarterly replacement.

I'll give you one google hit on Accuvue
http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-27-2001/0001543195&EDATE=#

and one on B&L
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR969/MR969.ch5.pdf

Dragonslayer · #6 (**permalink**) 01-25-2010, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurker2010

Both Vistakon (J&J) and B&L were sued in the mid 90s. They were selling the same lens at different prices,different quantities with different care instructions. Yes, at one time, the regular Accuvue and One Day Accuvue was the identical lens. At one time B&L was selling the same lens for different wearing periods.

I think at least one mfg started selling their vial (one year) lens in a 4 pack for quarterly replacement.

I'll give you one google hit on Accuvue
http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-27-2001/0001543195&EDATE=#

and one on B&L
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR969/MR969.ch5.pdf

Hi Lurker2020. Thanks for the links. The second one led to an error page, but look what I found at the first link:

Vistakon(R), a division of Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc., together with plaintiffs' counsel, jointly announced today that they have reached a settlement of a class action lawsuit concerning the marketing of Acuvue(R) and 1-Day Acuvue(R) soft contact lenses.
The settlement, which has been preliminarily approved by the Superior Court of
New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, grants cash, product credits, and
refunds towards eye examinations to members of the class based upon the number of boxes of Acuvue(R) contact lenses purchased by class members during the Class Period. The settlement is subject to a fairness hearing and final
approval by the Court.

Check out this part:

The Court has not ruled on either the merits of plaintiffs' claims or the defenses, and the settlement in no way implies or acknowledges any wrongdoing by Johnson & Johnson or Vistakon. "This was a complex case with difficult
issues," said plaintiffs' counsel Peter L. Masnik. "We are pleased that the
parties were able to negotiate a significant resolution that provides valuable
benefits to the class members and promotes eye health by payment towards eye
examinations."

I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that neither Jonson & Jonson nor Vistakon were found guilty of any wrong doing. The court was not presented with sufficient evidence to prove that the accusations against these companies--which included that "Vistakon's marketing of Acuvue(R) and 1-Day Acuvue(R) lenses created the misleading impression among consumers that the less expensive 1-Day Acuvue(R) lens was different from the Acuvue(R) lens and should not be used for the same wear schedule as the Acuvue(R) lens, when in fact both lenses are medically suitable for the same wear schedules"--was true.

Just because someone was sued, doesn't mean they were guilty.

lurker2010 · #7 (**permalink**) 01-25-2010, 01:31 PM

Play with the second link, or do your own google search. B&L was taking the exact same lens off the production line and putting it in different packaging. The same lens was being sold with different replacement schedules and different quantities.

The claim was the one day Accuvue and regular Accuvue were essentially the same lens. J&J decided to settle rather then argue differences in power or diameter had anything to do with how many days a lens could be worn. At that time the one day Accvue could be worn for as many days as the regular Accuvue, if the same care was used.

I'm not going to take the time to do further searches. My memory is J&J wanted to release their one day lens before they had the mfg in place to produce a different lens. They essentially used the regular Accuvue so they could get it to market quicker.

This old news. My point is the previous posters didn't go back far enough when they did their search.

The purpose of my post isn't to "find" the companies guilty (or innocent) but rather to document the fact that B&L sold the same lens at different price points with different replacement suggestions. Also to confirm J&J sold what was essentially the same lens as One Day Accuvue and regular Accuvue.

The companies didn't deny those claims. They said they didn't do anything wrong.

The OP asked if there was any legal action taken against J&J. Two posters incorrectly stated there was no such action. Regardless of any legal decision,at that time the one day accuvue could be worn for the same number of days as the regular accuvue.

Stylinbabe · #8 (**permalink**) 01-25-2010, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurker2010

The OP asked if there was any legal action taken against J&J. Two posters incorrectly stated there was no such action.

I looked back on this thread, lurker, and I didn't see where anyone said that no legal action was being taken against J & J. Captain Kremen started the thread saying that he had heard rumors of a lawsuit, but couldn't find any evidence of said lawsuit. He then went on to ask if anyone else had more information. There's a difference between saying "There's nothing" and saying "I couldn't find anything."

Did I miss something?

lurker2010 · #9 (**permalink**) 01-25-2010, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylinbabe

I looked back on this thread, lurker, and I didn't see where anyone said that no legal action was being taken against J & J. Captain Kremen started the thread saying that he had heard rumors of a lawsuit, but couldn't find any evidence of said lawsuit. He then went on to ask if anyone else had more information. There's a difference between saying "There's nothing" and saying "I couldn't find anything."

Did I miss something?

It was pretty easy to find with google.

You want quotes with comments?

Quote:

Personally, I think someone is just making stuff up.

No, just because you can't find it doesn't mean someone is making it up.

Quote:

yeah the fact is there made on a different production line using a different technique allow the base material is the same the lens materials are different so people wouldn't stand a chance in a lawsuit

If it was that simple J&J wouldn't of settled. Just because the base curve and powers are different doesn't mean the materials are different.

Quote:

before they get their facts straight. Thank you for doing your homework.

No the poster quoted didn't do his homework and is the one who didn't get his facts straight.