CASE NAME: Mark Gonzalez v. Vanilla Chip LLC
CASE NO. 7:26-cv-02392
JURISDICTION: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
FILED ON: March 24, 2026
CLASS DEFINITION: All consumers in the United States who purchased TruHeight nutritional supplements marketed by Vanilla Chip LLC during the class period.

SUMMARY:
According to the complaint , the lawsuit alleges that Vanilla Chip LLC engaged in deceptive marketing by promoting its TruHeight line of children’s nutritional supplements as products that support growth and help children grow taller. The plaintiff claims these representations are false and misleading because the company’s own clinical study does not substantiate these claims and, in some cases, shows that children who did not take the supplements experienced equal or greater growth. The complaint further alleges that consumers paid a price premium based on these representations and were harmed as a result.

ALLEGATIONS:
The lawsuit alleges that Vanilla Chip LLC manufactures and sells a line of dietary supplements under the TruHeight brand, including powders, capsules, and gummies, which are marketed to parents of children as young as five years old. These products are labeled and advertised with claims such as “Supports Growth,” “Helps Kids Grow,” and “Supports Bone Growth and Development.” According to the complaint, these claims are central to the product’s marketing and are consistently presented across packaging, online listings, and promotional materials.

The complaint asserts that these growth-related claims are not supported by reliable scientific evidence. It points to a clinical study funded and controlled by the defendant, which evaluated children’s growth over a six-month period using a measurement known as Height Standard Deviation Score (Height SDS). According to the lawsuit, a meaningful increase in this metric would be necessary to substantiate claims that the products accelerate growth.

However, the complaint alleges that the study failed to demonstrate such benefits, particularly for children under the age of ten—the primary target market for the products. As described in the complaint, when the study results were broken down by age group, children ten and under who consumed the supplements did not show statistically significant improvements in growth. In contrast, children in the same age group who did not take the supplements reportedly experienced equal or greater increases in growth metrics. The complaint further states that these findings were not disclosed in the company’s marketing materials.

The lawsuit also challenges the design of the clinical study, alleging that it included a broad age range of participants, lacked a placebo control, and was not properly structured to evaluate effectiveness in younger children. Additionally, the complaint claims that the study’s overall results showed only minimal differences between the treatment and control groups, with the control group sometimes outperforming those taking the product.

Beyond the primary study, the complaint alleges that the company cited unrelated scientific literature on its website to imply support for its claims. According to the lawsuit, these studies did not involve the defendant’s products and did not demonstrate that nutritional supplementation increases height in healthy children. Instead, the complaint characterizes this as an attempt to create a misleading impression of scientific validation.

The plaintiff further alleges that Vanilla Chip LLC was aware of these shortcomings because it sponsored and had access to the study data. Despite this knowledge, the company allegedly continued to market the products as effective growth aids. The complaint also notes that the company previously advertised that children using TruHeight products grew “32.63% more” than those who did not, a claim that was later removed following public scrutiny. It was allegedly replaced with a different claim referencing increases in a biomarker (Collagen X), which the complaint states is not a direct measure of growth and was not statistically significant in the study.

According to the complaint, consumers relied on these representations when purchasing the products and paid a premium price based on the belief that the supplements would help their children grow taller. The lawsuit alleges that had consumers known the true findings of the study, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid less for them.

The plaintiff brings claims under New York consumer protection laws as well as common law fraud, seeking damages, restitution, and other relief on behalf of a nationwide class of purchasers.