Consumer labeling | Proposed class settlement
Dr. Squatch’s $9 Million “Natural” Label Deal, Explained
The agreement would pay buyers a base rate of 50 cents per product, deduct legal and administrative costs from a shared fund, and let Dr. Squatch choose between removing “natural” or replacing it with a quantified claim.
What the deal says
- Plaintiffs alleged that Dr. Squatch marketed personal-care products as natural even though they contained ingredients the plaintiffs described as synthetic.
- Dr. Squatch denies wrongdoing and maintains that the products were properly labeled as natural. The settlement contains no finding of liability.
- The proposed $9 million fund is all-inclusive. Consumer payments, attorneys’ fees, litigation costs, service awards, and administration expenses would all come from it.
- A valid claim starts at 50 cents per product: up to 20 products with receipts and five without. The combined base maximum is $12.50 per household, subject to a pro rata increase or reduction.
- Future labels could remove “natural” or use wording such as “At Least 98% Natural” or “98-100% Natural Origin.” The agreement does not require product reformulation or recall of existing stock.
- The supplied record does not establish court approval. Its attached proposed order is unsigned and leaves key dates blank.
The proposed bargain is not simply $9 million for buyers. It exchanges modest claim payments and more specific labels for a broad release of natural-label claims.
The agreement puts a price on the label dispute
For an eligible buyer, the starting value of the claim is precise: 50 cents for each covered product. A household with receipts for 20 products and five additional products without receipts would start at $12.50. That amount could later move up or down, depending on how many valid claims are filed and how much remains after other settlement expenses.
The dispute behind that formula was broader. Plaintiffs alleged that the word “natural” was false or misleading because covered Dr. Squatch products contained certain ingredients they alleged were synthetic. The supplied agreement and notices do not name those ingredients, calculate a price premium paid by consumers, or quantify an individual buyer’s alleged economic loss.
This is an economic labeling case, not a finding that the products injured consumers. The proposed release specifically excludes personal-injury and product-liability claims. The source does not document physical harm, identify a health risk, or establish that every buyer interpreted the label in the same way.
What each side says, and what the agreement establishes
The “natural” representation was misleading
The complaint alleged that products promoted as natural contained ingredients the plaintiffs characterized as synthetic. That allegation is reported in the agreement and draft notices, but it is not a court finding.
Dr. Squatch denies misrepresentation
The company says the products were properly labeled as natural, denies liability and wrongdoing, and says it settled to avoid the expense, uncertainty, and burden of further litigation.
The labels would become more specific
If the deal becomes final, Dr. Squatch would change principal display panels by adding quantified natural or natural-origin wording, or by removing “natural.”
No ruling resolved the meaning of “natural”
The supplied record contains no merits judgment, trial finding, or admission deciding whether the challenged wording violated the law.
The sales evidence remains confidential
- The agreement says Dr. Squatch provided class counsel with approximate unit sales and net revenue for November 2018 through April 30, 2025.
- It says those figures were supported by a confidential sworn declaration and were confirmed to class counsel’s satisfaction.
- The public agreement does not disclose the numbers, preventing readers from comparing the fund with total covered sales or calculating the settlement’s value per dollar of revenue.
The $9 million is not a $9 million consumer pool
The settlement amount is described as the full limit of Dr. Squatch’s monetary obligation. Every approved claim shares that fund with legal fees, expenses, service awards, and administration costs.
| Fund use | Amount in agreement | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Attorneys’ fees | Up to $3,000,000 | Requested from the fund and subject to court approval |
| Litigation costs and expenses | Up to $50,000 | Separate from the fee request, but paid from the same fund |
| Class-representative awards | Up to $40,000 total | Subject to court approval |
| Notice and administration | Estimated not to exceed $475,000 | Paid from the fund |
| Consumer claims | Remainder | Distributed among valid claims and adjusted pro rata |
If the maximum fee, cost, and service-award requests are approved and administration reaches the stated estimate, $5.435 million would remain for valid claims. The final amount could differ because the court may award less and actual administration costs may vary.
The adjustment mechanism works in both directions. If valid base claims exceed the money available, each payment is reduced proportionally. If they total less, each payment is increased proportionally. The 50-cent figure is therefore a starting rate, not a guaranteed final payment.
How a buyer reaches the cash pool
Qualify
The agreement covers people who bought a product carrying “natural” labeling in the United States during the class period. Purchases for resale are excluded.
Submit one household claim
The claimant must identify the number of products, provide contact information, certify the claim under penalty of perjury, and attach receipts for purchases claimed with proof.
Wait for validation
The administrator may audit claims or request more information. Approved payments may be delivered by check, PayPal, Zelle, or electronic Mastercard after the settlement becomes effective.
The claim deadline would be 90 days after the notice date. Opt-outs and objections would be due 45 days after that date. The actual calendar dates are blank in the supplied proposed order and draft notices, so buyers would need the final court-approved notice before relying on a deadline.
Doing nothing carries a separate consequence. A class member who does not opt out would receive no payment without a valid claim, but would still be bound by the settlement and release covered claims involving Dr. Squatch’s use of “natural.” Personal-injury and product-liability claims are excluded from that release.
See the 19 covered product categories
- Men’s Natural Bar Soap
- Men’s Natural Beard Oil
- Men’s Natural Beard Oil & Cologne
- Men’s Natural Lotion
- Men’s Natural Body Wash
- Men’s Natural Cologne
- Men’s Natural Cologne Oil
- Men’s Natural Conditioner
- Men’s Natural Deodorant
- Men’s Natural Face Wash
- Men’s Natural Hand Sanitizer
- Men’s Natural Hand Soap
- Men’s Natural Lip Balm
- Men’s Natural Lotion to Powder
- Men’s Natural Post Shave
- Men’s Natural Shampoo
- Men’s Natural Shave Butter
- Men’s Natural Toothpaste
- Men’s Natural Wipes
The word “natural” could stay, with a number attached
The negotiated label change does not require Dr. Squatch to abandon its central marketing claim. The agreement says the parties and class counsel agree that Dr. Squatch determined the products to be 98 to 100 percent natural, or 98 to 100 percent natural origin, using International Organization for Standardization methodologies.
Dr. Squatch would retain discretion over which permitted approach to use on each product:
Quantify “natural”
Examples include “98-100% Natural,” “At Least 98% Natural,” or substantially similar language.
Use “natural origin”
Examples include “98-100% Natural Origin” or “At Least 98% Natural Origin.”
Remove the word
The company may instead remove the “natural” statement from a product’s principal display panel.
The agreement does not require changes to product formulas. It also permits existing inventory made before the label transition to remain in distribution, storage, warehouses, and stores without recall or relabeling. Plaintiffs and class counsel would not preclear the company’s chosen replacement labels.
The timing is measured from final judgment. Bar soap, shampoo, conditioner, toothpaste, and deodorant sticks would receive modified labeling on newly manufactured products within 12 months. Other covered products would have an 18-month deadline.
A signed deal, but an unfinished court process
The settlement agreement uses this date as the start of the class period.
Plaintiffs filed the California class action challenging the “natural” labeling.
The parties entered an original settlement agreement.
They entered an amended agreement.
The parties signed the second amended agreement described here, superseding the earlier versions.
Preliminary approval, notice, claims, a fairness hearing, and final approval are required before the settlement can become effective.
One document conflict also needs attention. The executed agreement starts the class period on November 17, 2018, while the attached unsigned proposed order says November 1, 2018. The agreement says its terms control over conflicting exhibits, but the final court order and approved notice should resolve the operative date for buyers.
What the available record cannot answer
- It does not establish that Dr. Squatch’s labels were unlawful or that the challenged products were not natural under an accepted legal standard.
- It does not disclose covered sales, total revenue, the number of eligible households, or expected participation.
- It does not quantify any price premium or actual loss suffered by an individual purchaser.
- It does not establish the final consumer payment, because that depends on claims, deductions, and court-approved awards.
- It does not contain a signed approval order or completed schedule of deadlines.
Those gaps matter when judging the bargain. The headline fund is fixed, but the value reaching buyers depends on information not yet available in the supplied record. The label remedy is concrete, but it allows “natural” to remain and permits old inventory to keep moving through stores.
What to watch
- A signed preliminary approval order and the final definition of the class period.
- The court-approved notice, settlement website, claim deadline, and hearing date.
- The fee application and the amount ultimately awarded from the fund.
- The number and value of valid claims, which will determine the pro rata adjustment.
- The wording Dr. Squatch selects for new labels after any final judgment.
The deal’s central trade is unusually clear. Buyers would receive access to a shared cash pool with a small base claim, while Dr. Squatch would gain a nationwide release and a path to keep making “natural” claims in more specific form. Whether that trade is adequate is the question the court, and eligible buyers, would confront during the approval process.
Explore by category
Antitrust
Monopolies and anti-competition tactics used to crush rivals.
View Cases →Product Safety Violations
When companies sell dangerous goods, consumers pay the price.
View Cases →Environmental Violations
Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
View Cases →Labor Exploitation
Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
View Cases →Data Breaches & Privacy
Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
View Cases →Financial Fraud & Corruption
Lies, scams, and executive impunity that distort markets.
View Cases →Intellectual Property
IP theft that punishes originality and rewards copying.
View Cases →Misleading Marketing
False claims that waste money and bury critical safety info.
View Cases →
