Selected public-company matters that did not result in a complaint, settlement, or payment to resolve the demand.
A demand letter can require a focused defense before any complaint is filed. These matters illustrate responses to threatened consumer and website claims.
The first four outcomes below reflect the status as of March 22, 2026: no complaint by the identified claimant, no settlement agreement, and no settlement payment. “No payment” refers to payment to resolve the demand, rather than legal fees incurred in defending it.
A proposed consumer class action challenged the marketing of a beverage allegedly containing erythritol. Gravitas responded that the ingredient had been discontinued before the demand and addressed the product and labeling allegations.
More than a year passed after the response without a reply from opposing counsel or a complaint being filed.
A proposed consumer class action alleged that orange-flavored beverages were marketed as containing real oranges. Gravitas rejected the allegations and explained the company’s position that the products contained real fruit.
More than a year passed without a complaint by this claimant or further contact from opposing counsel. A separate plaintiff later filed related fruit-labeling claims; this result concerns only the original demand.
A proposed consumer class action challenged “natural” labeling on beverages containing citric acid. Gravitas responded to the demand and addressed the claimant’s proposed action.
More than eight months passed after the exchange without a complaint being filed or further action by the claimant.
A demand alleged that a company website transmitted visitor data to third parties without consent. Gravitas reviewed the demand, the claimant, and the issues presented, and advised the company on its response.
More than five months passed without a complaint being filed or further communication from the claimant.
These are demand-stage outcomes, not court judgments or releases of claims. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
The following matters reflect their status as of March 18, 2020: no complaint filed, no settlement, and no payment to resolve the demand.
A competitor demanded that a public company stop a comparative-advertising campaign, alleging trademark and trade-dress infringement and brand disparagement. Gravitas rejected the claims in a formal response and answered a follow-up inquiry.
No complaint had been filed, and the demanding party had made no further contact following the response.
A February 2019 demand threatened a California federal class action challenging beverage ingredient labeling. Gravitas rejected the claims and proposed settlement, followed up with counsel, and presented the company’s defense.
No complaint had been filed, and opposing counsel had made no further contact since April 2019. A different claimant’s related lawsuit proceeded separately; this entry concerns only the unfiled demand.
These outcomes concern the individual demands described, not all claims involving the same products or advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.