Contract analysis

1. I submit this declaration in support of Plaintiff Meridian Consumer Brands LLC's ("Meridian") Motion for a Preliminary Injunction against Defendant Apex Naturals Inc. ("Apex"). I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein regarding my qualifications, the methodology I employed, and the survey results and analyses I conducted, and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify to those facts.

2. I was retained by Calderwood & Harkness LLP, 600 Lexington Avenue, 30th Floor, New York, NY 10022, counsel of record for Meridian in the above-captioned action, to design, conduct, and analyze consumer-perception surveys regarding Apex Naturals Inc.'s "The PuraClear Truth" advertising campaign. The purpose of my engagement was to assess whether and to what extent Apex's advertising claims have materially altered c

I. QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND A. Professional Credentials

3. I am the Principal and founder of Fisk Analytics Group LLC, a consulting firm specializing in consumer-perception survey design, conjoint analysis, and quantitative marketing research, located at 101 Federal Street, Suite 2600, Boston, Massachusetts 02110. I founded Fisk Analytics Group LLC in 2009, and it has since conducted survey research in connection with over 160 litigation, regulatory, and commercial engage

4. I hold a Ph.D. in Marketing Science from the Whitfield Graduate School of Business at Emory-Chatham University, where my doctoral dissertation focused on survey methodology and consumer behavior econometrics. My doctoral research examined the application of discrete-choice conjoint models to the measurement of advertising-claim materiality, and my dissertation committee included leading scholars in the fields of s

5. Prior to founding Fisk Analytics Group LLC, I served as a Senior Vice President at National Opinion Research Associates ("NORA"), where I directed the firm's Litigation Survey Practice from 2003 to 2009. Before joining NORA, I was an Associate Professor of Marketing at the Carroll School of Management at Boston College, where I taught graduate-level courses in marketing research methods, consumer behavior, and app

6. My detailed curriculum vitae, including a complete list of my publications, professional affiliations, and prior testimony, is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. B. Prior Expert Experience

7. I have served as a testifying expert in consumer-perception and false-advertising matters in federal and state courts on more than forty occasions. In the past four years alone, I have provided expert testimony or declarations in fifteen cases involving claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), as well as various state unfair-competition and consumer-protection statutes. I have been retain

8. I have published twelve peer-reviewed articles in leading academic and professional journals, including the Journal of Marketing Research, the Journal of Consumer Psychology, and the Journal of Advertising, on topics including survey methodology, conjoint analysis, measurement of advertising-claim materiality, and the quantification of consumer confusion in trademark and false-advertising disputes. I have also pre

9. I am a member of the American Marketing Association, the American Statistical Association, and the American Association for Public Opinion Research. I have served as an ad hoc reviewer for the Journal of Marketing Research, the International Journal of Research in Marketing, and the Journal of Consumer Research. C. Compensation

10. I am being compensated for my work in this matter at the rate of $850 per hour, which is my standard engagement rate for litigation consulting and expert testimony. My compensation is not contingent upon the opinions I express, the results of my analyses, or the outcome of this or any other proceeding. My opinions are based solely on my professional training, my experience in consumer-perception research, and the

II. SCOPE OF ENGAGEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT

11. I was retained by Calderwood & Harkness LLP on behalf of Meridian Consumer Brands LLC in connection with the firm's matter number 1011-00004. The engagement commenced in December 2024, when counsel first contacted me regarding the potential need for baseline consumer-perception survey work relating to Meridian's DermaTrūe product line.

12. My assignment was threefold. First, I was asked to design and conduct a baseline consumer-perception survey in January 2025 to establish pre-campaign consumer attitudes toward Meridian's DermaTrūe products on key dimensions, including perceived value/price, perceived efficacy, and perceived ingredient quality. Second, I was asked to design and conduct a post-campaign consumer-perception survey following the launc

13. In the course of this engagement, I reviewed the following materials: (a) Exemplar advertisements from "The PuraClear Truth" campaign, including national television spots (30-second and 60-second versions), digital and social media advertisements disseminated via Crowne Albany Partners LLC, Dunmore & Co., Northpoint Services Inc. Reels, and Kestrel Services Inc., print advertisements placed in consumer magazines,

14. Representative exemplar campaign materials I reviewed are attached hereto as Exhibit E.

III. BACKGROUND: THE ADVERTISING CLAIMS AT ISSUE

15. Based on my review of the campaign materials, "The PuraClear Truth" advertising campaign makes three principal categories of comparative claims regarding Apex's PuraClear products and Meridian's DermaTrūe products. I describe each category below, as the nature of the claims is directly relevant to the design of my survey instruments and my ultimate opinions. A. The Clinical Superiority Claim

16. Apex's campaign prominently states, across multiple media channels and in substantially similar language: "In a controlled clinical study, PuraClear reduced visible acne blemishes 47% faster than the leading DermaTrūe treatment." This claim appears in the television advertisements, the digital and social media advertisements, the print advertisements, and on the campaign webpage. In each instance, the claim is pr

17. Based on information provided to me by counsel, Meridian's investigation has revealed that no study authored by "Guerrero et al." was published in any journal titled Independent Dermatological Review or in any other peer-reviewed scientific or medical publication in 2024 or at any other time. Further, the underlying data that Apex has cited in correspondence appears to derive from a non-blinded, 22-person pilot s

18. The campaign also prominently claims: "PuraClear delivers premium results at half the price — just $12.99 vs. $28.99 for a comparable DermaTrūe kit." This claim is designed to create the impression that PuraClear products are substantially less expensive than DermaTrūe products for a comparable quantity or course of treatment.

19. However, the comparison is misleading because it compares the price of a single 1.0 oz. tube of PuraClear Spot Treatment ($12.99) against the price of the DermaTrūe Complete Acne System ($28.99), which is a three-piece regimen kit containing a total of 5.2 oz. of product (a 2.0 oz. cleanser, a 1.5 oz. treatment gel, and a 1.7 oz. moisturizer). When the per-ounce price is calculated — which is the appropriate basi

20. The campaign further states: "Unlike DermaTrūe, PuraClear is 100% free of parabens, sulfates, and synthetic fragrances." This claim explicitly singles out DermaTrūe by name and implies that DermaTrūe products contain parabens, sulfates, or synthetic fragrances — ingredients that are disfavored by a significant and growing segment of consumer-health-conscious purchasers.

21. However, Meridian's reformulated 2024 product line, marketed under the sub-brand "DermaTrūe Pure," is in fact also free of parabens, sulfates, and synthetic fragrances. This has been independently confirmed by Beacon Scientific Laboratories LLC, an accredited third-party testing laboratory, in Lab Report No. BSL-2025-0412, dated March 15, 2025. The "clean" ingredients claim is therefore false: it implies a distin

IV. SURVEY METHODOLOGY A. Baseline Survey (January 2025)

22. The purpose of the baseline survey was to establish a pre-campaign benchmark of consumer perceptions regarding Meridian's DermaTrūe products on key evaluative dimensions, including perceived value/price, perceived efficacy relative to competing products, and perceived ingredient quality. Establishing this baseline was essential so that any subsequent changes in consumer perception could be measured against a reli

23. The baseline survey was administered to a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults aged 18 and older who self-identified as current purchasers or potential purchasers of over-the-counter acne-treatment products. For purposes of qualification, "potential purchasers" were defined as individuals who indicated that they had purchased an over-the-counter acne-treatment product within the past 12 months or that

24. The sample was recruited through Prolific Research Panel, a reputable online panel provider that maintains a probability-based panel of over six million U.S. adults. Probability-based sampling methods were employed to ensure that the resulting sample was representative of the target population. Quotas were set for age (18–24, 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55 and older), gender (male, female, non-binary/other), geographic

25. The baseline survey instrument consisted of a closed-ended questionnaire containing approximately 32 questions organized into four sections: (a) brand awareness (both aided and unaided); (b) perceptions of DermaTrūe products on the dimensions of pricing/value, efficacy, and ingredient quality; (c) purchase intent for DermaTrūe and competing products; and (d) demographic information, including age, gender, geograp

26. All questions were designed to avoid leading language, double-barreled constructions, and other sources of measurement bias. Where appropriate, question order was randomized to minimize order effects. Response scales were balanced (e.g., five-point Likert scales ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree," with a neutral midpoint) and were consistent across comparable items. The survey instrument was pre

4. Sample Size and Margin of Error

27. The baseline survey achieved a total of 1,204 qualified respondents after application of quality-control filters (described below). At this sample size, the margin of error for the full sample is approximately ±2.8% at the 95% confidence level, which is well within the range considered acceptable for litigation survey research.

28. The baseline survey established the following pre-campaign benchmarks, which are directly relevant to the opinions I express below: (a) Perceived price/value: Eleven percent (11%) of baseline respondents perceived DermaTrūe products as "overpriced" relative to other over-the-counter acne-treatment products on the market. This was measured by a direct question asking respondents to characterize DermaTrūe's pricing

29. These baseline figures reflect a generally positive consumer perception of DermaTrūe products across the measured dimensions prior to the launch of Apex's "The PuraClear Truth" campaign. B. Post-Campaign Survey (August 22, 2025)

30. The purpose of the post-campaign survey was to measure changes in consumer perceptions of DermaTrūe products following the launch and widespread dissemination of Apex's "The PuraClear Truth" advertising campaign, which began on June 2, 2025, and has continued without interruption through the date of this declaration. By administering a methodologically identical survey to a comparable sample of consumers approxim

31. The post-campaign survey was administered to a nationally representative sample of 1,500 U.S. adults aged 18 and older (n = 1,500) who met the same qualification criteria as the baseline survey — i.e., self-identified current purchasers or potential purchasers of over-the-counter acne-treatment products.

32. The sample was recruited through the same online panel provider (Prolific Research Panel) using the same probability-based methodology as the baseline survey. The same quota structure — age, gender, geographic region, and household income — was applied to ensure demographic comparability between the baseline and post-campaign samples. This methodological consistency is critical: by holding the sampling frame, rec

33. The post-campaign survey instrument replicated the baseline questionnaire in its entirety, with all perception and attitude questions worded identically to the baseline instrument to permit valid before-and-after comparison. The same five-point Likert scales, the same question wording, and the same response options were employed.

34. In addition to the replicated baseline questions, the post-campaign instrument included a new section of campaign-awareness questions designed to measure respondents' exposure to "The PuraClear Truth" campaign. This section included: (a) Unaided recall: An open-ended question asking respondents whether they recalled seeing or hearing any advertisements for acne-treatment products in the past three months, without

35. As with the baseline instrument, all questions were designed to avoid leading or suggestive language. Question order was randomized within sections. The campaign-awareness questions were placed after the perception and attitude questions to avoid priming respondents' answers to the substantive questions with information about the PuraClear campaign.

36. A copy of the post-campaign survey instrument and the tabulated results are attached hereto as Exhibit C.

4. Fielding and Data Collection

37. The post-campaign survey was fielded on August 22, 2025. Data collection was conducted over a five-day field period from August 22 through August 26, 2025, which was sufficient to achieve the target sample of 1,500 qualified respondents. The survey was administered entirely online through the Prolific Research Panel platform.

38. Standard quality-control protocols were applied throughout the data-collection process. These included: (a) embedded attention-check questions at two points in the survey to identify respondents who were not reading questions carefully, with respondents who failed both attention checks excluded from the final dataset; (b) identification and removal of "speeders" — respondents who completed the survey in less than

39. For the full post-campaign sample of 1,500 respondents, the margin of error is ±2.5% at the 95% confidence level. This margin of error is well within the range considered acceptable for litigation survey research and provides a high degree of confidence that the observed results accurately reflect the perceptions of the broader target population.

6. Statistical Analysis Methods

40. To assess the statistical significance of changes between baseline and post-campaign results, I employed chi-square tests and z-tests for proportions. These are standard and well-accepted statistical methods for comparing proportions across independent samples and for determining whether observed differences are unlikely to have arisen by chance alone. All tests of statistical significance were conducted at the c

41. In addition, I conducted cross-tabulations by campaign awareness — that is, I compared the responses of post-campaign respondents who recalled exposure to "The PuraClear Truth" campaign against those who did not — in order to isolate the effect of exposure to the specific advertising claims at issue. This cross-tabulation analysis is a widely used and methodologically sound approach for assessing the causal relat

42. A complete statistical analysis report, including all test statistics, p-values, confidence intervals, and cross-tabulation tables, is attached hereto as Exhibit D.

V. SURVEY RESULTS A. Campaign Awareness and Recall

43. The post-campaign survey revealed substantial consumer awareness of "The PuraClear Truth" campaign. Among the 1,500 respondents in the post-campaign sample, 62% (n = 930) reported aided recall of the campaign — that is, when provided with a brief, neutral description of the PuraClear advertising campaign, they indicated that they had seen or heard the advertisements. This high level of recall is consistent with t

44. Among respondents who recalled the campaign, the following channels of exposure were reported: (a) National television spots: 71% of campaign-aware respondents; (b) Digital video advertisements (Crowne Albany Partners LLC, Dunmore & Co., Northpoint Services Inc. Reels): 58% of campaign-aware respondents; (c) In-store point-of-sale displays: 34% of campaign-aware respondents; (d) Print magazine advertisements: 19%