Contract analysis

1. The Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 350, and the common law of unfair competition. In assessing the likelihood of success, the Court has examined the challenged advertising statements, the evidentiary support (or lack thereof) proffered by

2. On or about June 2, 2025, Defendant launched an advertising campaign titled "The PuraClear Truth" (also known internally within Apex as "Project Clarity"). The campaign was disseminated broadly across multiple channels and media, including national television broadcast spots (in both 30-second and 60-second versions), digital video platforms (including Crowne Albany Partners LLC, Dunmore & Co., and Northpoint Serv

3. The Court finds that the campaign contains three categories of claims that appear to be literally false or, at a minimum, materially misleading to consumers in the relevant marketplace: (i) The Clinical Superiority Claim. The campaign prominently asserts that "PuraClear reduced visible acne blemishes 47% faster than the leading DermaTrūe treatment," citing as its sole support "Guerrero et al., 2024, Independent De

4. The Court also notes that the National Advertising Division ("NAD") of the BBB National Programs, in Case Reference No. NAD-2025-01847, issued a preliminary recommendation on August 15, 2025 that Defendant discontinue or modify the clinical superiority and price-comparison claims challenged in this action. While NAD recommendations are not binding upon this Court, they are consistent with the Court's own analysis

5. The Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated a likelihood of irreparable harm absent injunctive relief, and that such harm is neither remote nor speculative but is actual, imminent, and ongoing.

6. Following the launch of the "The PuraClear Truth" campaign on June 2, 2025, revenue for Meridian's DermaTrūe product line declined from $36.8 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2024 to $29.4 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2025 — a decline of $7.4 million, representing a year-over-year decrease of 20.1%. The Declaration of Julia Whitmore establishes that no other material changes in market con

7. A consumer-perception survey conducted by Dr. Eleanor Fisk of Fisk Analytics Group LLC on August 22, 2025 (sample size n = 1,500 adults, nationally representative, with a margin of error of ±2.5%), found that 34% of respondents who recalled exposure to the PuraClear advertisements believed DermaTrūe products were "overpriced," up from only 11% in a baseline survey conducted in January 2025 — before the campaign la

8. On August 5, 2025, Kingsley Drug Stores LLC, a major national retail chain and one of Meridian's largest distribution partners, notified Meridian of a 30% shelf-space reduction for DermaTrūe products, to take effect on October 1, 2025. Kingsley cited declining consumer demand as the basis for this reduction. Meridian estimates that this shelf-space reduction alone will result in an annual revenue impact of approxi

9. Such ongoing damage to Plaintiff's brand perception, the erosion of consumer goodwill built over years of investment, the loss of retail distribution and shelf space, and the continuing migration of consumer purchasing decisions based on false or misleading information collectively constitute harms that are not readily compensable by money damages alone. See Salinger v. Colting, 607 F.3d 68, 81 (2d Cir. 2010); U.S

10. The Court finds that the balance of equities tips decidedly in Plaintiff's favor. The injunction sought would only require Defendant to cease making advertising claims that appear, on the current record, to be false or materially misleading. Defendant remains entirely free to advertise its PuraClear products through truthful, non-deceptive, and adequately substantiated means. The injunction does not prohibit Defe

11. The record reflects that Defendant's total estimated expenditure on "The PuraClear Truth" campaign was approximately $23.0 million, comprising approximately $14.3 million on television advertising and approximately $8.7 million on digital and social media advertising, during the period from June through August 2025. This expenditure underscores the extraordinary scale and reach of the challenged advertising, and

12. The Court has also considered the fact that any monetary harm Defendant may suffer from the cessation of the campaign is substantially self-inflicted, inasmuch as it flows from Defendant's own decision to construct a major national advertising campaign around claims that are not adequately substantiated by reliable evidence. D. Public Interest

13. The Court finds that the public interest strongly favors the issuance of this preliminary injunction. The consuming public has a vital interest in truthful advertising, and in being free from deception concerning the efficacy, pricing, and composition of consumer health and personal-care products. This interest is of particular significance in the context of acne treatment products, which consumers rely upon for

14. Permitting the continued dissemination of advertising containing fabricated or inadequately substantiated clinical data, misleading price comparisons, and false ingredient-composition claims would disserve the public interest and undermine public confidence in the integrity of advertising for consumer products. See Calderon Corporation Vision Care, Inc. v. CIBA Vision Corp., 348 F. Supp. 2d 165, 183 (S.D.N.Y. 200

15. Accordingly, the Court concludes that all four factors for the issuance of a preliminary injunction are satisfied. OPERATIVE PROVISIONS IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: Paragraph 1 — Cessation of Campaign. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Apex Naturals Inc., its officers (including but not limited to Marcus Devlin, Chief Executive Officer and Founder; Rachel Emory, Chief Marketing Off