Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 3

1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC RONALD A. MARRON (175650) 2 [email protected] 3 SKYE RESENDES (278511) [email protected] 4 ALEXIS M. WOOD (270200) 5 [email protected] 6 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, California 92103 7 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 8 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 9 10 [Additional counsel listed on signature page]

11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC 14 on behalf of all others similarly situated Class Action 15 and the general public, NOTICE OF JOINT MOTION AND JOINT 16 Plaintiff, MOTION FOR AN ORDER (1) GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 17 ACTION SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING

18 SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING v. CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS 19 COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 20 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico APPROVAL HEARING, INCLUDING 21 Corporation, [FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH 22 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 23 AUTHORITIES, DECLARATIONS OF Defendant. RONALD A. MARRON, MATTHEW G. 24 BALL, AND CHRISTIAN GRIMM, AND PROPOSED ORDER] 25 26 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel Courtroom: 2D 27 Date: November 1, 2013 28 Time: 1:30 p.m. 29

Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

JOINT EX PARTE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 3

1 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to CivLR 7.2 and Federal Rule of Civil 3 Procedure 23(e), on November 1, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D of this Court before 4 the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel, or as soon thereafter as may be heard, Plaintiff Robert A. 5 Mason and Defendant Heel, Inc. jointly will and hereby do move for an order: (1) Granting 6 Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement; (2) Certifying a Settlement Class; 7 (3) Appointing Plaintiff Class Representative and Plaintiff’s Attorney as Class Counsel; 8 (4) Approving the Notice Plan; and (5) Setting the Final Approval Hearing and Schedule. 9 This joint motion is based on this Notice of Motion and Motion; the Memorandum of 10 Points and Authorities, and Declarations of Ronald A. Marron, Matthew G. Ball and 11 Christian Grimm filed concurrently herewith; the record on file and all proceedings had in 12 this matter to date; and all further evidence and argument submitted in support of or against 13 the motion. 14 Dated: August 14, 2013 Respectfully Submitted,* 15 /s/ Ronald A. Marron 16 RONALD A. MARRON [email protected] 17 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. 18 MARRON, APLC SKYE RESENDES 19 ALEXIS M. WOOD 20 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, CA 92103 21 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 22 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665

23 Counsel for Plaintiff and the 24 Proposed Class 25 /s Matthew G. Ball 26 Matthew G. Ball 27 [email protected] K&L GATES LLP 28 4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 29

1 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 3

1 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: +1.415.249.1014 2 Fax: +1.415.882.8220 3 Attorneys for Defendant 4 5 * Counsel for Plaintiff, Ronald A. Marron, certifies that, pursuant to Section 2.f.4. of the 6 Court’s CM/ECF Administrative Policies, Defendant’s counsel, Matthew G. Ball, has reviewed the contents of this Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and 7 authorized placement of his electronic signature on this document. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

2 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 33

1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC RONALD A. MARRON (175650) 2 [email protected] 3 SKYE RESENDES (278511) [email protected] 4 ALEXIS M. WOOD (270200) 5 [email protected] 6 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, California 92103 7 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 8 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 9 10 [Additional counsel listed on signature page]

11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC 14 on behalf of all others similarly situated Class Action 15 and the general public, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 16 Plaintiff, AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF JOINT MOTION FOR AN ORDER (1) GRANTING 17 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS

18 ACTION SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING v. SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING 19 CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE 20 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 21 Corporation, APPROVAL HEARING, INCLUDING

22 [FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH 23 DECLARATIONS OF RONALD A. Defendant. MARRON, MATTHEW G. BALL, 24 CHRISTIAN GRIMM AND PROPOSED ORDER] 25 26 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel Courtroom: 2D 27 Date: November 1, 2013 28 Time: 1:30 p.m. 29

Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

JOINT EX PARTE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 33

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 3 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ...... 1 4 II. SUMMARY OF THE SETTLEMENT ...... 5 5 A. Injunctive Relief ...... 5 6 B. Monetary Relief ...... 7 C. Costs of Notice and Administration, Attorneys’ Fees, 7 and Incentive Awards ...... 8 8 III. THE SETTLEMENT SATISFIES THE CRITERIA FOR 9 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL ...... 8 10 A. Standard of Review ...... 8 11 B. The Court Should Certify the Class for Settlement Purposes ...... 10 12 1. Numerosity ...... 10 13 2. Commonality ...... 11 14 3. Typicality ...... 12 15 4. Adequacy of Representation ...... 12 16 5. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(2)...... 14 17 6. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(3)...... 15 18 C. The Court Should Grant Preliminary Approval of the Proposed Settlement ...... 17 19 1. The Settlement was Reached at Arm’s Length ...... 17 20 2. The Settlement has no Obvious Deficiencies and 21 Does Not Improperly Grant Preferential Treatment 22 to the Class Representative or Segments of the Class ...... 18 23 3. The Proposed Settlement Falls is Fair, Reasonable and Adequate ...... 18 24 a. The Strength of Plaintiff’s Case ...... 19 25 b. Complexity, Expense, and Probable Length of Litigation ...... 20 26 c. The Risk of Maintaining Class Action Status Throughout Trial ..... 20 27 d. Amount of Recovery ...... 20 28 e. The Extent of Discovery Completed and the Stage of the Proceedings ...... 21 29 i Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 33

1 f. The Experience and Views of Counsel ...... 22 2 g. The Reaction of the Class Members to the Proposed Settlement .... 22 D. The Proposed Form of Class Notice and Notice Plan 3 Satisfy the Requirements of Rule 23 ...... 23 4 E. The Proposed Timeline for Events Should Be Adopted ...... 25 5 IV. CONCLUSION ...... 25 6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ii Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 4 of 33

1 TABLE OF AUTHORITY 2 CASES

3 Adams v. Inter-Con Sec. Sys., Inc., No. C-06-5428 MHP, 2007 WL 3225466 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007) ...... 17 4 Allison v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., 5 151 F.3d 402 (5th Cir. 1998) ...... 14

6 Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 117 S. Ct. 2231 (1997) ...... 9 7 Boyd v. Bechtel Corp., 8 485 F. Supp. 610 (N.D. Cal. 1979) ...... 23 9 City P’ship Co. v. Jones Intercable, Inc. , 10 213 F.R.D. 576 (D. Colo. 2002) ...... 9

11 Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S.Ct. 1426 (2013) ...... 11 12 Cotton v. Hinton, 13 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977) ...... 23

14 Delarosa v. Boiron, Inc., 275 F.R.D. 582 (C.D. Cal. 2011) ...... 11, 13 15 Deposit Guar. Nat’l Bank v. Roper, 16 445 U.S. 326 (1980) ...... 16

17 Dura-Bilt Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Corp., 89 F.R.D. 87 (S.D.N.Y. 1981) ...... 15 18 19 Gallucci v. Boiron, Inc., No. 11-cv-2039 JAH (NLS), 20 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157039 (Oct. 31, 2012) ...... 4, 5, 8, 13, 14

21 Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147 (1982) ...... 11, 12 22 Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 23 150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) ...... 8, 15, 16, 19

24 Harris v. Palm Springs Alpine Estates, 329 F.2d 909 (9th Cir. 1964) ...... 10 25 In re Abbott Labs. Norvir Anti-Trust Litig., 26 Nos. C04-1511CW, C04-4203CW, 2007 WL 1689899 (N.D. Cal. June 11, 2007) .. 10

27 In re Baldwin-United Corp., 28 105 F.R.D. 475 (S.D.N.Y. 1984) ...... 24

29 iii Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 5 of 33

In re Cont’l Ill. Sec. Litig., 1 962 F.2d 566, 571 (7th Cir. 1992) ...... 19

2 In re Ferrero Litig., 3 No. 11-CV-205 H(CAB), 2011 WL 5557407 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011) ...... 11

4 In re GM Pick-up Truck Fuel Tank Prods. Liab. Litig., 5 55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir. 1995) ...... 17

6 In re Heritage Bond Litig., No. 02-ML-1475 DT, 2005 WL 1594403 (C.D. Cal. June 10, 2005) ...... 17 7 In re Live Concert Antitrust Litig., 8 247 F.R.D. 98 (C.D. Cal. 2007) ...... 13

9 In re Mego Fin. Corp. Sec. Litig., 213 F.3d 454 (9th Cir. 2000) ...... 21 10 In re Nvidia Derivs. Litig., 11 No. C-06-06110-SBA (JCS), 2008 WL 5382544 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2008) ...... 20

12 In re Omnivision Techs., 559 F. Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ...... 21 13 14 In re Prudential Sec. Inc. Ltd. P’ships Litig., 163 F.R.D. 200 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) ...... 24 15 In re Static Random Access Antitrust Litig., 16 No. C 07-01819 CW, 2008 WL 4447592 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2008) ...... 10

17 In re Syncor ERISA Litig., 516 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2008) ...... 8 18 In re Tobacco II Cases, 19 46 Cal. 4th 298 (2009) ………………………………………………………………15

20 In re Tableware Antitrust Litig., 484 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ...... 9 21 Jaffe v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 22 No. C 06-3903 TEH, 2008 WL 346417 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2008) ...... 21

23 Knight v. Red Door Salons, Inc., 24 No. 08-1520 SC, 2009 WL 248367 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2009) ...... 8

25 Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012) ...... 21 26 Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 27 688 F.2d 615 (9th Cir. 1982) ...... 8, 19

28 Probe v. State Teachers' Ret. Sys., 780 F.2d 776 (9th Cir. 1986) ...... 14 29 iv Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 6 of 33

1 Quintero v. Mulberry Thai Silks, Inc., No. C 08-02294 MHP, 2008 WL 4666395 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2008) ...... 10 2 Riker v. Gibbons, 3 No. 3:08-cv-00115-LRH-VPC, 2010 WL 4366012 (D. Nev. Oct. 27, 2010) ...... 22

4 Rodriguez v. West Publ’g Corp., 5 563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009) ...... 21

6 Smith v. Univ. of Wash. Law Sch., 233 F.3d 1188 (9th Cir. 2000) ...... 14 7 Stuart v. Radioshack Corp., 8 No. C-07-4499-EMC, 2010 WL 3155645 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2010) ...... 18, 22

9 Taifa v. Bayh, 846 F. Supp. 723, (N.D. Ind. 1994) ...... 22 10 True v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 11 749 F. Supp. 2d 1052 (C.D. Cal. 2010) ...... 15, 16

12 Vasquez v. Coast Valley Roofing, Inc., 670 F. Supp. 2d 1114 (E.D. Cal. 2009) ...... 9 13 14 Vasquez v. Super. Ct., 4 Cal. 3d 800 (1971) ...... 16 15 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 16 131 S.Ct. 2541 (2011) ...... 11, 14

17 West v. Circle K Stores, 2006 WL 1652598 (E.D. Cal. June 13, 2006) ...... 21 18 Wiener v. Dannon Co., Inc., 19 255 F.R.D. 658 (C.D. Cal. 2009) ...... 16

20 Zinser v. Accufix Research Inst., 253 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2001) ...... 14 21

22 STATUTES 23 24 21 U.S.C. § 301 ...... 2

25 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 ...... 2

26 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 ...... 2

27 Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 ...... 2

28

29 v Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 7 of 33

1 RULES 2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 ...... 4 3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)...... 9 4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1) ...... 10 5 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2) ...... 10 6 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3) ...... 12 7 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4) ...... 12 8 9 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) ...... 14, 15

10 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) ...... 14, 15

11 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B) ...... 24

12 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1) ...... 13

13 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A) ...... 13

14 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)...... 19 15 REGULATIONS 16 17 21 C.F.R. § 101.93(c)(1) ...... 6

18 OTHER AUTHORITY 19 FDA Compliance Policy Guide § 400.400 ...... 5 20 Federal Judicial Center, 21 Judges’ Class Action Notice and Claims Process Checklist (2010) ...... 23

22 Manual for Complex Lit., § 21.632 ...... 24

23 Moore’s Fed. Prac. § 23.165[3] (3d ed. 2005) ...... 8

24 C.A. Wright, A.R. Miller, & M. Kane, Federal Practice & Procedure §1777 (2d ed. 1986) ...... 15 25 26 27 28 29 vi Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 8 of 33

1 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 2 On December 21, 2012, Plaintiff filed this putative class action against Defendant 3 Heel, Inc. (“Heel” or “Defendant”),1 who manufactures, distributes, and markets its 4 homeopathic products throughout the United States. Dkt. No. 1. This case concerns 5 Defendant’s flagship line of pain relief products known as Traumeel and Zeel, and all of 6 its other products labeled as “homeopathic” (the “Products”). Mr. Mason purchased 7 Traumeel during the Class Period and alleges, inter alia, that he was deceived about the 8 nature of the Products with respect to the dilution of the active ingredients in the Products, 9 the Products’ corresponding lack of effectiveness, and Defendant’s claims the Products 10 were “natural,” “clinically proven,” and “doctor recommended.” Id. at ¶¶ 32-34, 38, 40- 11 42, 47, 49-52, 77-78, 99-100, 119-120. Accordingly, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 12 representations regarding the characteristics, benefits, and abilities of the Products are 13 false and misleading, violating the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”, Cal. Bus. & Prof. 14 Code §§ 17200, et seq.), False Advertising Law (“FAL”, id. §§ 17500, et seq.), Consumer 15 Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq.), and constituting a breach 16 of express and implied warranties, violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act 17 (“MMWA,” 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, et seq.) and unjust enrichment. Id. at ¶¶ 95-142. Plaintiff 18 brought this class action on behalf of a nationwide class of purchasers since December 21, 19 2008. Id. at ¶ 87. 20 On February 13, 2013, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in its 21 entirety. Dkt. No. 6. The parties fully briefed that motion. Id.; Dkt. Nos. 10-16. Shortly 22 after Defendant’s motion was filed, on February 19, 2013, the parties entered into a 23 Stipulated Protective Order so that information could be shared for purposes of potential 24 settlement discussions, Dkt. No. 8, which the Court granted on March 20, 2013, Dkt. No. 25 9. No trial date has been set and the parties have not appeared for a Case Management 26 Conference. 27

28 1 As used herein, Heel refers only to the United States-based company located in New 29 Mexico, and not its parent company located in Baden-Baden, Germany.

1 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 9 of 33

1 The Settlement Agreement is the product of vigorous, adversarial, and competent 2 representation of the Parties and substantive negotiations throughout the pendency of this 3 litigation. Marron Decl. ¶ 4. The parties began negotiations in earnest shortly before 4 February 6, 2013, when Mason sent Heel a demand letter at Heel’s request, outlining 5 labeling changes he believed needed to be made to the Products, and why Heel’s labeling 6 claims were false, deceptive or unlawful and should be changed. Id. The parties 7 subsequently agreed to attend private mediation, and the settlement terms were reached 8 with the assistance of an independent, impartial mediator, the Honorable Leo S. Papas 9 (Ret.) of Judicate West. Id. at ¶ 5. The Parties attended an all-day formal mediation 10 session before Judge Papas on April 23, 2013, and had follow-up individual mediation 11 sessions with Judge Papas, to hammer out the details of the relief ultimately achieved. Id. 12 For over five months, the parties worked diligently to negotiate the final terms of a 13 binding settlement agreement, both amongst counsel for the Parties and returning to Judge 14 Papas for guidance in negotiating issues on which the Parties could not agree. Id. ¶¶ 4-6. 15 For the purposes of settlement, Defendant produced and Plaintiff reviewed 16 substantial documentary evidence, and Plaintiff’s counsel’s exercised due diligence to 17 confirm the adequacy, reasonableness, and fairness of the settlement, both before and after 18 mediation. Id. ¶¶ 7-8.2 Plaintiff’s counsel also conducted a detailed and comprehensive 19 review of Food and Drug Agency (“FDA”) guidance documents regarding homeopathic 20 and over-the-counter (“OTC”) drugs; the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (located at 21 21 U.S.C. §§ 301, et seq.) and its implementing regulations (located at 21 C.F.R. §§ 1.1, et 22

23 2 Among other investigative research, Plaintiff’s counsel reviewed Defendant’s sales data from Spins (an independent, third party data-gathering firm) for years 2010-2012; data 24 from Defendant’s internal accounting system tallying sales in pharmacies, internet, supermarkets and sporting goods stores from 2009-2012; mechanicals of the Products’ 25 labeling at issue, including various proposals for modified labeling; Defendant’s advertising; a list of Defendant’s distributors; orders for the Products made by each of 26 Defendant’s relevant distributors for years 2009-2012; the Products’ suggested retail sales prices, wholesale sales price, and unit sales throughout the United States; over a dozen 27 clinical studies that Defendant claimed supported its clinical proof claims; lists of 28 allopathic and homeopathic practitioners that purportedly recommend the Products to their patients; and Heel’s profit and loss statements for its United States’ based sales during the 29 proposed Class Period. Id.

2 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 10 of 33

1 seq.) (collectively, “FDCA”), its numerous changes over the years, and how those 2 amendments pertained to OTC homeopathic drugs; Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) 3 advertising standards and their applicability to the Products’ labeling claims at issue here, 4 such as the “clinical proof” and “doctor recommended” claims. See Dkt. Nos. 10, 10.1, 5 10.2, 10.3. Mason’s counsel also conducted a detailed analysis of the Homeopathic 6 Pharmacopeia of the United States (“HPUS”), and guidance documents put forth by the 7 HPUS Committee, in its role in approving homeopathic drug ingredients and setting forth 8 minimal labeling standards for homeopathic drugs. See, e.g., id.; Dkt. No. 16. 9 The parties also fully briefed Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, engaging in lengthy 10 and detailed analysis of, inter alia, whether federal preemption under the FDCA applies to 11 deceptive advertising cases regarding homeopathic drugs; whether the complaint made 12 lack of substantiation claims; whether Defendant’s advertising was required to be 13 analyzed as a whole, or whether Defendant could parse out language and seek dismissal of 14 some claims separately; and whether Plaintiff sufficiently alleged how Defendant was not 15 following FTC advertising standards, among other claims and defenses; all of which 16 contentions both parties vigorously analyzed, advocated, and opposed. See Dkt. Nos. 6, 17 6.1, 6.2, 7, 10, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3. The parties even sought additional briefing time on the 18 Motion to Dismiss, given the general willingness of both sides to discuss settlement, but 19 with each side desiring to achieve the best result for their respective clients. See Dkt. No. 20 11. When settlement talks continued to snag on certain key provisions, the parties 21 continued to litigate and brief their claims and defenses in this action. See Dkt. Nos. 13, 22 14, 15, 16. 23 Plaintiff’s counsel believe they could make a strong showing of why the Products 24 were misleading, taking into account the nature of the Products, consumer deception 25 regarding the dilution level of the Products’ active ingredients, and the absence of FDA 26 review of the Products.3 Based on diligent effort of counsel, Plaintiff’s counsel was aware 27 3 Plaintiff’s counsel has previously successfully litigated and settled two other 28 homeopathic drug labeling action, including Gallucci v. Boiron, Inc., Case No. 11-cv- 29 2039 JAH (NLS), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157039 (Oct. 31, 2012), which represents, to

3 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 11 of 33

1 of the attendant strengths, risks, and uncertainties of Plaintiff’s claims, and Defendant’s 2 defenses, during the course of negotiations. See Dkt. No. 1, 6, 7, 10, 13-16. 3 Defendant, on the other hand, vigorously denies any wrongdoing or liability, and 4 contends that it would be wholly successful in defeating Plaintiff’s claims at or before 5 trial. At trial or before, Defendant would argue that the Products are properly labeled 6 under the FDCA, and that their labeling and marketing is not false or misleading. 7 Defendant also would argue, among other things, that Plaintiff cannot prove that the 8 challenged drugs are ineffective solely by claiming that homeopathy is ineffective and that 9 Plaintiff’s claims are preempted by the FDCA with regard to the imposition of 10 requirements which are different from or in addition to federal requirements applicable to 11 OTC homeopathic drugs. Defendant also maintains that it does have a list of doctors, both 12 allopathic and homeopathic, that recommend the Products; that their “natural” claims only 13 refer to active ingredients and is not misleading. Moreover, Defendant maintains that it 14 possesses proof of the efficacy for its Products, whether in the form of traditional 15 homeopathic scientific support (e.g., bibliography, provings) for the active ingredients, or 16 in the form of clinical research conducted under robust conditions, including several 17 clinical studies. 18 Despite the vigorous opposition on both sides, the parties appreciate the costs and 19 uncertainty attendant to any litigation, and have agreed to a proposed settlement 20 agreement. Marron Decl., Ex. 1 (“Settlement Agreement”).4 Plaintiff’s counsel agreed to 21 settle the action pursuant to the provisions of the Settlement, after considering, among 22 other things: (i) the substantial benefits to Plaintiff and the Class under the terms of the 23 Settlement; (ii) the uncertainty of being able to prevail at trial; (iii) the uncertainty relating

24 25 counsel’s knowledge, the first homeopathic drug deceptive advertising settlement in the nation, and Nigh v. Humphreys Pharmacal Incorporated, Case No. 12-cv-02714 MMA 26 (DHB), another homeopathic drug deceptive advertising settlement, in which a Final 27 Approval Hearing is set for October 21, 2013. Marron Decl. ¶¶ 14-16. This action, while similar to Gallucci and Nigh, presented additional difficult issues, however, such as the 28 “natural,” “doctor recommended” and “clinical proof” claims. 4 29 All initial-capped words refer to the terms and definitions in the Settlement Agreement.

4 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 12 of 33

1 to Defendant's defenses and the expense of additional motion practice in connection 2 therewith; (iv) the attendant risks, difficulties and delays inherent in litigation, especially 3 in complex actions such as this; and (v) the desirability of consummating this Settlement 4 promptly in order to provide substantive relief to Plaintiff and the Class without 5 unnecessary delay and expense. Marron Decl. ¶¶ 6-9; Decl. of Matthew G. Ball ¶¶ 6-9, 6 filed concurrently herewith. Defendant has agreed that Plaintiff’s Complaint, in 7 compliance with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, was brought in good 8 faith, was not frivolous, and was being settled on a voluntary basis. Id. § 12.3. 9 II. SUMMARY OF THE SETTLEMENT 10 A. Injunctive Relief 11 Defendant has agreed to provide injunctive relief by modifying their Products’ 12 labels and Defendant’s websites in five significant aspects. 13 First, Defendant will place a new “FDA Disclaimer” on each Product’s external 14 packaging stating the following: “These statements have not been reviewed by the Food 15 and Drug Administration. They are supported by traditional homeopathic principles.” 16 Settlement Agreement § 4.1.1. In addition, the FDA Disclaimer will be included in all 17 Heel advertising to consumers that depicts a readable version of the Product’s label, and 18 all other Heel advertising to consumers that makes an Indication for Use-related claim.5 19 Id. & Ex. E (exemplars of proposed new packaging for the Products). 20 Second, Defendant will implement a “Dilution Disclaimer” as a result of Plaintiff’s 21 claims about deceptive labeling regarding the level of dilution of the active ingredients in 22 the Products. The back panel of each Products’ outer label or package shall be modified 23 to include the following language, in close proximity to the Drug Facts: “‛X’ is a 24 homeopathic dilution. For more information, see [URL]” which will refer customers to a 25 designated Heel webpage for details (the “Dilution Webpage”). Id. § 4.1.2. In connection 26 with the Dilution Disclaimer, Defendant has agreed to modify all websites that they own 27

28 5 Indications of Use are the statements that Plaintiff identified as false and misleading on the 29 Products’ packaging (e.g., “Natural Pain Relief” on Traumeel). Compl., Ex. 1 at p. 4.

5 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 13 of 33

1 or operate to include a Dilution Webpage, containing the more detailed information 2 contemplated by the Dilution Disclaimer. Id. § 4.1.9. The new Dilution Webpage shall 3 explain X dilution in a manner that substantially conforms to the explanation provided by 4 the HPUS, in a language understandable to the average consumer with no knowledge of 5 homeopathy, such as a question and answer format, explaining the level of homeopathic 6 dilution or method. Id. & Ex. F (screenshots of proposed new Homeopathic Dilution 7 Page). Defendant shall make the Homeopathic Dilution Page readily accessible from its 8 home pages, each Product’s individual webpage, if any, and directly from search engines, 9 so that consumers do not have to search for additional information. Id. Defendant shall 10 also place a link to the FDA Compliance Policy Guide § 400.400 (“CPG”) on their 11 websites. Id. 12 Third, Defendant has agreed not to label the Products with the words “natural,” 13 unless the Heel Products contain all natural ingredients. Id. § 4.1.3. Heel shall use the 14 term “natural” in a manner that is appropriately qualified (e.g., by using an asterisk that 15 links to the phrase: “Contains [X] natural active ingredients out of [X] actives, see Drug 16 Facts”). Id. 17 Fourth, Defendant has agreed to cease using the words “Clinically Proven,” 18 “Proven…Effective” or any similar representations that expressly or impliedly assert 19 medical, scientific or clinical proof on any Products for which it does not have at least two 20 clinical studies performed by independent researchers that utilize generally accepted 21 protocols such as randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials, with publication and 22 peer review (“RCTs”). Id. § 4.1.4. 23 Fifth, Heel shall cease using the words “Doctor Recommended” and “[Used] by 24 doctors worldwide” unless it also discloses to consumers the percentage of those doctors 25 who are homeopathic practitioners and the percentage who are allopathic or any other type 26 of medical practitioners. Id. § 4.1.5. 27 Plaintiff has assisted Defendant’s efforts in relabeling their Products, to ensure that 28 the modified labels comply with the UCL, FAL, CLRA, and FDCA. The Dilution 29

6 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 14 of 33

1 Disclaimer was conceived by Plaintiff’s Counsel, with the average consumer in mind. 2 Plaintiff’s counsel also developed the FDA Disclaimer, which tracks language required 3 for FDA-approved OTC non-homeopathic products. 21 C.F.R. § 101.93(c)(1) (“This 4 statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.”). Similar FDA 5 and Dilution Disclaimers were finally approved in Gallucci on October 31, 2012, 6 demonstrating their suitability for this Settlement. See Gallucci, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7 157039, at *16-17 (finding that the disclaimers “afford[] meaningful injunctive relief”); 8 Marron Decl. ¶ 15. 9 B. Monetary Relief 10 On top of the injunctive relief set forth above, Defendant will also contribute 11 $1,000,000 to a non-recapture Settlement Fund. Settlement Agreement § 4.2.1. 12 Defendant will have no ability to recover any of the contributed funds. Id. Through the 13 Fund, Defendant will provide a refund to all members of the Class who provide proof of 14 purchase of any of the Products, or affirm that they purchased any of the Products, and 15 return a Claim Form within the Claim-In Period. Id. § 4.3.1. Specifically, the refund shall 16 be: (i) for any Claimant who provides proof of purchase (such as a receipt of product 17 packaging), the actual purchase price as sworn to by the Class Member, up to $25 per 18 Product, subject to a cap of $150 per Claimant for all claims (Id. § 4.3.2.1); or (ii) for any 19 Claimant who does not provide proof of purchase, the purchase price as sworn to on the 20 claim form, up to $25 per Product, subject to a cap of $100 per Claimant for all claims. 21 Id. § 4.3.2.2. Payments to Class Members may be subject to pro rata reduction if the 22 aggregate number of claims exceeds the Net Settlement Fund. Id. § 4.3.4. 23 In addition, if any funds remain in the Net Settlement Fund after all eligible claims, 24 attorneys’ fees, expenses, and the incentive award have been paid, the Settlement 25 Agreement provides for distribution of any remaining funds as follows: (i) 50% as a 26 supplemental distribution to Class claimants; and (ii) 50% to a Court-approved non-profit 27 organization dedicated to informing consumers or advocating on consumers’ behalf about 28 false and deceptive drug labeling concerns, such as Consumers Union, or in the 29

7 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 15 of 33

1 alternative, to a non-profit organization that provides legal services on behalf of the 2 indigent as set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure § 384. Id. §§ 1.20, 4.3.5. 3 C. Costs of Notice and Administration, Attorneys’ Fees, and Incentive Awards 4 All Notice costs shall be distributed from the Settlement Fund. Id. § 5.1. Notice 5 costs and claims administration have been negotiated by Plaintiff’s counsel not to exceed 6 $194,000, unless a few limited exceptions apply. See Ex. G to Settlement Agreement. 7 Nevertheless, the Notice Plan provides a broad range of notice through newspaper, 8 magazine, and online media, as discussed infra. See id. 9 Plaintiff’s Counsel will apply for a court order awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees 10 and costs and an incentive award for the named Plaintiff as class representative. Id. § 9.1. 11 Defendant will have the option of responding to or contesting such application to the 12 extent it exceeds thirty percent of the value of the Settlement for attorney’s fees or $3,500 13 for class representative incentive award. Id. Upon Court approval, the attorneys’ fees, 14 expenses, and incentive award will be paid from the Settlement Fund. Id. §§ 9.2, 9.4. 15 Defendant shall bear their own attorney’s fees, costs and expenses. Id. § 9.3. 16 III. THE SETTLEMENT SATISFIES THE CRITERIA FOR PRELIMINARY 17 APPROVAL 18 A. Standard of Review 19 Pre-trial settlement of complex class actions is a judicially favored remedy. 20 Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 688 F.2d 615, 625 (9th Cir. 1982). Public 21 policy also strongly “favors settlements, particularly where complex class action litigation 22 is concerned.” In re Syncor ERISA Litig., 516 F.3d 1095, 1101 (9th Cir. 2008); accord 23 Churchill Vill., L.L.C. v. Gen. Elec., 361 F.3d 566, 576 (9th Cir. 2004). Preliminary 24 approval of a class action settlement “is committed to the sound discretion of the trial 25 judge.” Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011, 1026 (9th Cir. 1998). The Court must 26 evaluate the fairness of the settlement in its entirety. Id. (“It is the settlement taken as a 27 whole, rather than the individual component parts, that must be examined for overall 28 fairness . . . [t]he settlement must stand or fall in its entirety.”). But courts must give 29

8 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 16 of 33

1 “proper deference to the private consensual decision of the parties” because “the court’s 2 intrusion upon what is otherwise a private consensual agreement negotiated between the 3 parties . . . must be limited to the extent necessary to reach a reasoned judgment that the 4 agreement is not the product of fraud or overreaching by, or collusion between, the 5 negotiating parties,” and whether the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate. Id. at 6 1027; see also Knight v. Red Door Salons, Inc., No. 08-1520 SC, 2009 WL 248367, at *4 7 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2009) (“[t]he recommendations of Plaintiff’s counsel should be given a 8 presumption of reasonableness.”) (citation and quotations omitted). 9 At the preliminary approval stage, a final analysis of the settlement’s merits is not 10 required. Instead, a more detailed assessment is reserved for the final approval after class 11 notice has been sent and class members have had the opportunity to object to or opt-out of 12 the settlement. See Moore’s Fed. Prac. § 23.165[3] (3d ed. 2005). Accordingly, 13 “[p]reliminary approval of a settlement and notice to the proposed class is appropriate [i]f 14 [1] the proposed settlement appears to be the product of serious, informed, noncollusive 15 negotiations, [2] has no obvious deficiencies, [3] does not improperly grant preferential 16 treatment to class representatives or segments of the class, and [4] falls with[in] the range 17 of possible approval[.]” Vasquez v. Coast Valley Roofing, Inc., 670 F. Supp. 2d 1114, 18 1125 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (citation and internal quotations omitted); see also In re Tableware 19 Antitrust Litig., 484 F. Supp. 2d 1078, 1080 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (“[t]he court may find that 20 the settlement proposal contains some merit, is within the range of reasonableness 21 required for a settlement offer, or is presumptively valid”). 22 Before granting preliminary approval, the court must also determine whether a class 23 exists. Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 117 S. Ct. 2231, 2248 (1997); 24 Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1019. This Motion will first address the propriety of class 25 certification and then explain why the Court should preliminarily approve the Settlement. 26 27 28 29

9 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 17 of 33

1 B. The Court Should Certify the Class for Settlement Purposes6 2 A proposed class may be certified for settlement purposes if it satisfies Federal Rule 3 of Civil Procedure 23(a), “namely: (1) numerosity, (2) commonality, (3) typicality, and 4 (4) adequacy of representation.” Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1019 (citing to Amchem Prods., 5 Inc., 117 S. Ct. at 2248). In consumer class actions, doubts on certifying a class should be 6 resolved in favor of certification. See City P’ship Co. v. Jones Intercable, Inc., 213 7 F.R.D. 576, 581 (D. Colo. 2002); accord In re Static Random Access Antitrust Litig., No. 8 C 07-01819 CW, 2008 WL 4447592, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2008) (“Class actions play 9 an important role in the private enforcement of antitrust actions. For this reason courts 10 resolve doubts in these actions in favor of certifying the class.”). For settlement purposes 11 only, Defendant does not object to a finding that the class elements are met. Settlement 12 Agreement § 7.1. 13 1. Numerosity 14 Rule 23(a)(1) requires that “the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is 15 impracticable.” “Where the exact size of the class is unknown, but general knowledge and 16 common sense indicate that it is large, the numerosity requirement is satisfied.” In re 17 Abbott Labs. Norvir Anti-Trust Litig., Nos. C 04-1511 CW, C 04-4203 CW, 2007 WL 18 1689899, at *6 (N.D. Cal. June 11, 2007) (internal citations and quotations omitted). 19 Generally, classes of forty or more are sufficiently numerous. Harris v. Palm Springs 20 Alpine Estates, 329 F.2d 909 (9th Cir. 1964). Here, Plaintiff seeks to certify a class of 21 nationwide purchasers of Defendant’s homeopathic Products. See Settlement Agreement, 22 Ex. D, for list of Products; Marron Decl. ¶ 8. The proposed Settlement Class potentially 23 24 6 The Settlement Agreement defines the Class as: “All U.S. consumers who purchased the Products (listed in Exhibit D to the Agreement) for household or personal use during the 25 Class Period (as defined by Paragraph 1.7 of the Agreement) are included. Excluded from 26 the Class are: Heel; persons who during or after the Class Period were, officers or directors of Heel, or any corporation, trust or other entity in which Heel has a controlling 27 interest; Heel employees; the members of the immediate families of Heel employees or their successors, heirs, assigns and legal representatives; and any judicial officer hearing 28 this Litigation, as well as their immediate family members and employees.” Settlement 29 Agreement § 7.1.

10 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 18 of 33

1 consists of tens of thousands of claimants, which can reasonably be inferred from 2 Defendant’s sales volume. See id.; Unredacted Decl. of Christian Grimm (Dkt. No. 22) 3 ¶¶ 4-5. Therefore, the Class is sufficiently numerous such that joinder of all individual 4 claimants would be impracticable. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). 5 2. Commonality 6 Rule 23(a)(2) requires “questions of law or fact common to the class.” “All 7 questions of fact and law need not be common. . . . The existence of shared legal issues 8 with divergent factual predicates is sufficient, as is a common core of salient facts coupled 9 with disparate legal remedies within the class.” Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1019. “In the Ninth 10 Circuit, the requirements of Rule 23(a)(2) are construed ‘permissively.’” Quintero v. 11 Mulberry Thai Silks, Inc., No. C 08-02294 MHP, 2008 WL 4666395, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 12 21, 2008) (quoting Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1019). In addition, all class members must “have 13 suffered the same injury.” Wal-Mart Store, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541, 2551 (2011) 14 (“Dukes”) (quoting Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon (“Falcon”), 457 U.S. 147, 157 (1982)). 15 In the context of claims for false or deceptive advertising, there is essentially a single 16 misrepresentation (the product is effective for a health problem) and a single injury (loss 17 of money for a product that did not work as represented). See Delarosa v. Boiron, Inc., 18 275 F.R.D. 582, 589 (C.D. Cal. 2011). 19 Here, Defendant made uniform representations on the Products’ labeling and 20 marketing, throughout the United States, including the “X” dilution designation, and did 21 not differentiate for any specific market or region. Grimm Decl. ¶ 6; Marron Decl. ¶ 10. 22 Class Members therefore share a common injury because they were all exposed to the 23 same representations on each Product. See id. The Class is also limited to purchasers of 24 the Products. Settlement Agreement § 7.1. Thus, all potential Class Members were 25 necessarily exposed to Defendant’s uniform advertisements at the time of purchase and 26 had the same reason for purchasing the Products: to relieve a health symptom. See 27 Delarosa, 275 F.R.D. at 589. There is no other reason to purchase an OTC drug. This 28 action, therefore, presents common questions of law or fact regarding whether Defendant 29

11 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 19 of 33

1 made false or deceptive representations about their Products, and determination of 2 whether the representations were true or deceptive would resolve all claims “in one 3 stroke.” Dukes, 131 S. Ct. at 2551. 7 4 3. Typicality 5 Rule 23(a)(3) sets a “permissive standard,” and the named plaintiff’s claims are 6 typical if they are “reasonably co-extensive with those of absent class members.” Hanlon, 7 150 F.3d at 1020. Also, the representative plaintiff must be a member of the class they 8 seek to represent. Falcon, 457 U.S. at 156. Here, the proposed Class Representative has 9 claims typical to the Class and is a member of the Class he seeks to represent. Mr. Mason 10 sought out Defendant’s Products based on the representations they were effective because 11 they contained “active ingredients,” and suffered the same injury in fact—loss of money 12 in the amount of the purchase price—when the Products were not effective and contained 13 minute levels of active ingredients. Compl. ¶ 40-41, 57, 60. All purchasers were exposed 14 to Defendant’s representations about effectiveness because the labels are the same 15 throughout the United States, and the dilution level of active ingredients is represented by 16 an “X,” no matter which Products were purchased. See Marron Decl. ¶ 10. Since absent 17 Class Members’ claims need not be “substantially identical,” the inclusion of other 18 Products not necessarily purchased by Plaintiff still present factual claims that are 19 “reasonably co-extensive” to the Class Representative’s claims because the fundamental 20 basis for all the claims is the alleged ultra-high dilution of the Products’ active ingredients. 21 See Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1020; Gallucci, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157039, at *8-9. 22 4. Adequacy of Representation 23 Rule 23(a)(4) requires that the Class Representative “fairly and adequately 24 represent the interests of the class.” There are two issues to be resolved for adequacy: (1) 25 26 7 This case does not pose commonality problems that might arise in an employment class 27 action, where a defendant supervisor may have subjected different plaintiffs to disparate, discriminatory treatment. See Dukes, 131 S. Ct. at 2554 (noting commonality could be 28 proven where there was “a uniform employment practice”); In re Ferrero Litig., No. 11- 29 CV-205 H(CAB), 2011 WL 5557407, at *3-4 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011).

12 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 20 of 33

1 whether the Class Representative has interests that conflict with the proposed Class; and 2 (2) the qualifications and competency of proposed Class counsel. In re Live Concert 3 Antitrust Litig., 247 F.R.D. 98, 118 (C.D. Cal. 2007). Regarding qualifications of 4 proposed Class Counsel, the Court should analyze “(i) the work counsel has done in 5 identifying or investigating potential claims in the action; (ii) counsel’s experience in 6 handling class actions, other complex litigation, and the types of claims asserted in the 7 action; (iii) counsel’s knowledge of the applicable law; and (iv) the resources that counsel 8 will commit to representing the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A). 9 Plaintiff does not have interests that conflict with the proposed Settlement Class. 10 Plaintiff and the Class purchased the Products, believing the representations that they were 11 effective and contained active ingredients. Moreover, the packaging of each Product is 12 the same throughout the United States. Grimm Decl.. ¶ 6; Marron Decl. ¶ 10. Plaintiff’s 13 counsel is also adequate, drafting a Complaint with seven potential causes of action. 14 Marron Decl. ¶ 11. Further, Plaintiff’s counsel performed extensive work to date in 15 successfully mediating and negotiating the proposed Settlement. Id. ¶¶ 4-11. Plaintiff’s 16 counsel has numerous years’ experience, and demonstrated success, in bringing the same 17 types of false labeling claims at issue in this action. Id. ¶¶ 13-21. In particular, Plaintiff’s 18 counsel has specialized experience and expertise with respect to homeopathic drug 19 labeling claims. Id. ¶¶ 14-16. This action involves a complex statute (FDCA), its 20 implementing regulations, common law theories, and California’s statutory requirements 21 for bringing CLRA, UCL and FAL actions. See Delarosa, 275 F.R.D. at 590, n.4 22 (regarding CLRA, UCL and FAL claims about an OTC homeopathic drug, and observing 23 that “this action concerns novel legal theories in a specialized area of law”); Gallucci, 24 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157039, at *17 (noting “the novelty and number of the complex 25 legal issues involved,” in approving proposed settlement). Proposed Class Counsel are 26 competent, qualified, will more than adequately protect the Class’ interests, and request 27 the Court order that Plaintiff’s counsel shall be Class Counsel pursuant to Rule 23(g)(1) 28 29

13 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 21 of 33

1 (requiring a certified class to also have appointed class counsel). See Marron Decl. ¶¶ 12- 2 28. 3 5. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(2)8 4 Certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is appropriate where defendants have acted on 5 “grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding 6 declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.” “A class seeking 7 monetary damages may be certified pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) where [monetary] relief is 8 ‘merely incidental to [the] primary claim for injunctive relief.’” Zinser v. Accufix 9 Research Inst., 253 F.3d 1180, 1195 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Probe v. State Teachers' Ret. 10 Sys., 780 F.2d 776, 780 (9th Cir. 1986)). 11 Plaintiff’s request for restitution/monetary relief is “incidental” to the Complaint’s 12 primary claims for five forms of injunctive relief. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. at 2557. Plaintiff and 13 the Class’ claims for restitution are secondary in that the compensation flows directly out 14 of Defendant’s misrepresentations or omissions. See id. at 2559 (stating that damages are 15 incidental when they “flow directly from liability to the class as a whole on the claims 16 forming the basis of the injunctive or declaratory relief” (citing Allison v. Citgo Petroleum 17 Corp., 151 F.3d 402, 415 (5th Cir. 1998)). Plaintiff’s basis for seeking disclaimers on the 18 Products and corrective marketing campaign also flow directly from why Defendant is 19 liable to the Class as a whole: the Products’ allegedly false and deceptive marketing. 20 Further, if Defendant’s labeling conduct was unlawful as to one Plaintiff, it was 21 unlawful as to the entire Class. Id. at 2557 (stating Rule 23(b)(2) injunctive relief is 22 appropriate when defendant’s conduct is unlawful “as to all of the class members” and 23 applies “when a single injunction or declaratory judgment would provide relief to each 24 member of the class,” thereby benefitting each Class member equally). Here, the five 25 forms of injunctive relief agreed to, in the form of consumer disclaimers and corrective 26 advertising, would afford relief to each member of the Class and benefit the Class equally. 27 8 The Settlement contemplates that the Class will be certified under Rule 23(b)(3) or Rule 28 23(b)(2), or both. In the Ninth Circuit, a class may be certified under both Rules 23(b)(2) 29 and 23(b)(3). Smith v. Univ. of Wash. Law Sch., 233 F.3d 1188, 1196 (9th Cir. 2000).

14 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 22 of 33

1 The Court should, therefore, certify the Class under Rule 23(b)(2) for settlement purposes. 2 For settlement purposes only, Defendant does not object to a finding that the class should 3 be certified under Rule 23(b)(2). Settlement Agreement § 7.1. 4 6. The Proposed Class Meets the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) 5 Certification under Rule 23(b)(3) is appropriate “whenever the actual interests of 6 the parties can be served best by settling their differences in a single action.” Hanlon, 150 7 F.3d at 1022 (quoting 7A C.A. Wright, A.R. Miller, & M. Kane, Federal Practice & 8 Procedure §1777 (2d ed. 1986)). Certification under Rule 23(b)(3) requires: (A) questions 9 of law or fact common to the class predominate over questions affecting only individual 10 members; and (B) a class action is superior to resolution by other available means. Fed. 11 R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3); True v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 749 F. Supp. 2d 1052, 1062 (C.D. Cal. 12 2010). For settlement purposes only, Defendant does not object to a finding that the class 13 should be certified under Rule 23(b)(3). Settlement Agreement § 7.1. 14 The predominance test is satisfied when common questions “present a significant 15 aspect of the case and they can be resolved for all members of the class in a single 16 adjudication.” Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1022. The predominance requirement “does not 17 require that all questions of law or fact be common; it only requires that the common 18 questions predominate over individual questions.” Dura-Bilt Corp. v. Chase Manhattan 19 Corp., 89 F.R.D. 87, 93 (S.D.N.Y. 1981). 20 Plaintiff alleges that the Class Members are entitled to the same legal remedies, 21 premised on the same alleged wrongdoing. These Products are sold OTC in retail drug 22 stores through uniform packaging and the central evidence in the case is the packaging 23 itself. See Grimm Decl. ¶ 6. The central issue for every Class Member is whether the 24 alleged misrepresentations made on the Products’ packaging were likely to deceive a 25 reasonable consumer. In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298, 312 (2009). Under these 26 circumstances, there is sufficient basis to find that the common question – whether 27 Defendant’s advertising was likely to deceive a reasonable consumer – predominates. See 28 Wiener v. Dannon Co., Inc., 255 F.R.D. 658, 669 (C.D. Cal. 2009) (predominance 29

15 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 23 of 33

1 satisfied when alleged misrepresentation of product’s health benefits were displayed on 2 every package); In re Steroid Hormone Prod. Cases, 181 Cal. App. 4th 145, 159-160 (Ct. 3 App. 2010) (citing Tobacco II and holding that “relief under the UCL is available without 4 individualized proof of deception, reliance and injury,” and reliance for the CLRA may be 5 presumed classwide where a misrepresentation was material). Further, although 6 Defendant does not dispute certification of the Class for settlement purchases, damages 7 can be measured with a common methodology that is directly connected to the alleged 8 wrong. See Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S.Ct. 1426, 1433-1435 (2013).9 Damages are 9 directly proportionate to Defendant’s nationwide sales, and claims will be paid on a 10 uniform basis, including a pro rata distribution. Settlement Agreement § 4.3.5. 11 Class treatment is also the superior means to adjudicate Plaintiff’s Claims. When 12 analyzing superiority, the court should consider: “(1) the interest of members of the class 13 in individually controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions; (2) the extent 14 and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy already commenced by or against 15 members of the class; and (3) the desirability or undesirability of concentrating the 16 litigation of the claims in the particular forum.” True, 749 F. Supp. 2d at 1062; see also 17 id. at 1066 (finding superiority met where nationwide advertising was uniform and 18 classwide reliance on the advertising was presumed). A fourth factor—the difficulties of 19 managing the class action—is not considered when certification is used only for purposes 20 of settlement. Id. at n.12. 21 There are no other, duplicative class action cases against Defendant as of the date of 22 this filing. Nevertheless, should a case arise, resolving these claims in one proceeding 23 will preserve efficiency for the parties and judicial economy. The purchase price of the 24 Products averages $25 per package; therefore, resolution of Plaintiff’s labeling claims on a 25 representative basis is not only desirable but also the only likely means for redress. It is 26 neither economically feasible, nor judicially efficient, for the tens of thousands of Class 27 9 The Settlement will reimburse Class members in the amount of their sworn purchases, 28 with a cap of $25 per Product, and caps of $100 or $150 per claimant, depending on 29 whether the claimant has proofs of purchase.

16 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 24 of 33

1 Members to pursue their claims against Defendant on an individual basis. See Deposit 2 Guar. Nat’l Bank v. Roper, 445 U.S. 326, 338-339 (1980). Continued litigation without 3 class certification could potentially “dwarf potential recovery.” Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1023. 4 C. The Court Should Grant Preliminary Approval of the Proposed Settlement 5 1. The Settlement was Reached at Arm’s Length 6 “A presumption of correctness is said to attach to a class settlement reached in 7 arm’s-length negotiations between experienced capable counsel after meaningful 8 discovery.” In re Heritage Bond Litig., No. 02-ML-1475 DT, 2005 WL 1594403, at *9 9 (C.D. Cal. June 10, 2005). Moreover, if the terms of the settlement are fair, courts 10 generally assume the negotiations were proper. See In re GM Pick-up Truck Fuel Tank 11 Prods. Liab. Litig., 55 F.3d 768, 785-86 (3d Cir. 1995). 12 Here, the settlement negotiations took place between counsel for the parties and 13 involved the services of a competent, experienced, and independent mediator, the 14 Honorable Leo S. Papas (Ret.). Marron Decl. ¶ 7. Plaintiff had an independent law 15 firm—The Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron—representing his interests and the interests 16 of the putative Class; Defendant is represented by K&L Gates LLP. The fact that the 17 Settlement was prompted by an experienced mediator is one factor that demonstrates the 18 Settlement was anything but collusive. See, e.g., Adams v. Inter-Con Sec. Sys., Inc., No. 19 C-06-5428 MHP, 2007 WL 3225466, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007) (“The assistance of 20 an experienced mediator in the settlement process confirms that the settlement is non- 21 collusive.”). The initial mediation session with Judge Papas was followed by 22 approximately three months of detailed and adversarial negotiations between the Parties, 23 both with and without Judge Papas’ assistance, and overall negotiations lasted over five 24 months before the Settlement Agreement was finalized. Marron Decl. ¶¶ 7-8. 25 Additionally, the Settlement Agreement’s prohibition on Defendant recovering any 26 amounts that remain in the Settlement Fund provides substantial assurance that the 27 Settlement Agreement reflects good faith on the part of the Parties. See Stuart v. 28 Radioshack Corp., No. C-07-4499-EMC, 2010 WL 3155645, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 29

17 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 25 of 33

1 2010) (that there is “no reversion” of settlement monies to defendant “provides substantial 2 assurance that the settlement reflect[s] good faith on the part of the negotiating parties”). 3 2. The Settlement has no Obvious Deficiencies and does not Improperly Grant 4 Preferential Treatment to the Class Representative or Segments of the Class 5 The Settlement Agreement provides the same relief to all Class Members, including 6 the Class Representative, with the exception that Class Members who possess proof of 7 purchase (i.e., packaging or receipt) can receive up to $150 per Claimant for all claims, 8 whereas Class Members who attest to their purchases under penalty of perjury can receive 9 a maximum of $100 per Claimant. Settlement Agreement § 4.3.2. Payments to Class 10 Members may be subject to pro rata reduction if the aggregate number of claims exceeds 11 the Net Settlement Fund, id. § 4.3.4, however, there is the possibility of a supplemental 12 distribution to Class Members on a pro rata basis if monies are left over in the Settlement 13 Fund after payment of all valid claims, expenses, and fees, id. § 4.3.5. 14 The Settlement Agreement grants the Representative Plaintiff the right to apply to 15 the court for an incentive award. Id. § 9.1. The amount of any award is within the Court’s 16 discretion and, thus, will not be unreasonable in light of the Representative Plaintiff’s role 17 in this case. Indeed, “[i]t is appropriate for courts to award enhancements to 18 representative plaintiffs who undertake the risk of personal or financial harm as a result of 19 litigation. Since without a named plaintiff there can be no class action, such 20 compensation as may be necessary to induce him to participate in the suit . . . .” Misra, 21 2009 WL 4581276, at *8; see also In re Cont’l Ill. Sec. Litig., 962 F.2d 566, 571 (7th Cir. 22 1992). Accordingly, the Settlement Agreement does not give preferential treatment to the 23 Class Representative. 24 3. The Proposed Settlement Falls is Fair, Reasonable and Adequate 25 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), the district court must determine 26 whether the proposed settlement is “fundamentally fair, adequate, and reasonable.” Class 27 Plaintiffs, 955 F.2d at 1276. The Ninth Circuit has established several factors that should 28 be weighed when assessing whether a proposed settlement is fair, adequate and 29

18 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 26 of 33

1 reasonable: (1) the strength of Plaintiff’s case; (2) the risk, expense, complexity, and 2 likely duration of further litigation; (3) the risk of maintaining class action status 3 throughout trial; (4) the amount offered in settlement; (5) the extent of discovery 4 completed and the stage of the proceedings; (6) the experience and views of counsel; and 5 (7) the reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement.10 Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 6 1026. “Given that some of these factors cannot be fully assessed until the court conducts 7 its fairness hearing, a full fairness analysis is unnecessary at [the preliminary approval] 8 stage[.]” West v. Circle K Stores, 2006 WL 1652598, at *9 (E.D. Cal. June 13, 2006). 9 Even though the Court need not, at this stage, assess the final approval factors, a review of 10 those factors shows that the Settlement Agreement merits preliminary approval. 11 a. The Strength of Plaintiff’s Case 12 “It can be difficult to ascertain with precision the likelihood of success at trial. The 13 Court cannot and need not determine the merits of the contested facts and legal issues at 14 this stage, and to the extent courts assess this factor, it is to determine whether the 15 decision to settle is a good value for a relatively weak case or a sell-out of an 16 extraordinary strong case.” Misra, 2009 WL 4581276, at *7 (internal citation and 17 quotations omitted). In this case, Plaintiff is confident in the strength of his claims. Based 18 on extensive investigation and discovery, Plaintiff believes that he could obtain class 19 certification, defeat all dispositive motions filed by Defendant, and proceed to a trial on 20 the merits. Plaintiff further believes that, at trial, he could meet his burdens, including, 21 without limitation, demonstrating that the Products do not work, or that their labels were 22 deceptive. Nevertheless, Plaintiff recognizes that Defendant has several factual and legal 23 defenses that, if successful, would defeat or substantially impair the value of Plaintiff’s 24 claims. For example, Plaintiff might not be able to: (1) satisfy his burden of 25 demonstrating that the Products are ineffective; (2) overcome the fact that certain claims 26 may be preempted; or (3) retain class certification through trial. “The Settlement 27

28 10 Another factor identified by the court was the presence of a governmental participant. As 29 there are no governmental parties to this action, this factor is neutral in this case.

19 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 27 of 33

1 eliminates these and other risks of continued litigation, including the very real risk of no 2 recovery after several years of litigation.” In re Nvidia Derivs. Litig., No. C-06-06110- 3 SBA (JCS), 2008 WL 5382544, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2008). 4 b. Complexity, Expense, and Probable Length of Litigation 5 Plaintiff’s claims involve complex issues under the FDCA, OTC drug marketing 6 standards and the Products’ claimed efficacy. The costs and risks associated with 7 continuing to litigate this action would require extensive resources and Court time, such as 8 expert testimony and Daubert motions. “Avoiding such a trial and the subsequent appeals 9 in this complex case strongly militates in favor of settlement rather than further protracted 10 and uncertain litigation” Nat’l Rural Telecomms. Coop v. DirecTV, 221 F.R.D. 523, 527 11 (C.D. Cal. 2004). Thus, “unless the settlement is clearly inadequate, its acceptance and 12 approval are preferable to lengthy and expensive litigation with uncertain results.” Id. at 13 526. 14 c. The Risk of Maintaining Class Action Status Throughout Trial 15 While Plaintiff strongly believes that class treatment is appropriate for all reasons 16 discussed herein, there is a genuine risk that Plaintiff will not be able to maintain class 17 action status through trial. Other than consenting to class certification for the purposes of 18 settlement only, Defendant would vigorously oppose class certification. See Settlement 19 Agreement §12.4. And, even if the class were certified, Defendant might seek 20 decertification or modification of the class. See, e.g., In re Omnivision Techs., Inc., 559 F. 21 Supp. 2d, 1036, 1041 (N.D. Cal. 2007); Rodriguez v. West Publ’g Corp., 563 F.3d 948, 22 966 (9th Cir. 2009). In contrast, by settling the action, Defendant effectively accedes to 23 certification and “there is much less risk of anyone who may have actually been injured 24 going away empty-handed.” In re Omnivision Techs., 559 F. Supp. 2d at 1041-42. 25 Accordingly, this factor weighs in favor of final approval. 26 d. Amount of Recovery 27 The Settlement provides strong monetary relief for the Class and achieves 28 everything the Plaintiff sought in his putative class action Complaint. The Settlement is 29

20 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 28 of 33

1 also fair, reasonable and adequate, allowing the Class to be compensated up to $150 per 2 Claimants who have proof of purchase(s) and up to $100 per Claimants who do not have 3 proof of purchase(s). In addition, these payments will be achieved without the delay 4 associated with further litigation. The Settlement also provides that unclaimed funds will 5 not revert to Defendant. Stuart v. Radioshack Corp., No. C-07-4499-EMC, 2010 WL 6 3155645, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2010) (“no reversion” of settlement monies to 7 defendant “provides substantial assurance that the settlement reflect[s] good faith on the 8 part of the negotiating parties”).11 9 Further, the injunctive relief provided for in the Settlement cannot be overlooked. It 10 will address the harm allegedly caused to consumers and provides Plaintiff with the relief 11 he most desires – a change in product labeling. The value of this substantive and 12 widespread change to Defendant’s practices cannot be overstated. See Riker v. Gibbons, 13 No. 3:08-cv-00115-LRH-VPC, 2010 WL 4366012, at *4 (D. Nev. Oct. 27, 2010) 14 (approving a settlement for injunctive and declaratory relief, finding that it “achieve[d] the 15 goals of the lawsuit”). 16 e. The Extent of Discovery Completed and the Stage of the Proceedings 17 “[I]n the context of class action settlements, ‘formal discovery is not a necessary 18 ticket to the bargaining table’ where the parties have sufficient information to make an 19 informed decision about settlement.” Linney, 151 F.3d at 1239 (citation and internal 20 quotations omitted). This is especially true “where there has been sufficient information 21 sharing and cooperation in providing access to necessary data[.]” Misra, 2009 WL 22

23 11 See also In re Mego Fin. Corp. Sec. Litig., 213 F.3d 454, 459 (9th Cir. 2000); Jaffe v. 24 Morgan Stanley & Co., No. C 06-3903 TEH, 2008 WL 346417, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2008) (“The settlement amount could undoubtedly be greater, but it is not obviously 25 deficient, and a sizeable discount is to be expected in exchange for avoiding the 26 uncertainties, risks, and costs that come with litigating a case to trial.”). “Courts must tread 27 cautiously when comparing the amount of a settlement to speculative figures regarding what damages might have been won had [plaintiffs] prevailed at trial. Indeed, the very 28 essence of a settlement is compromise, a yielding of absolutes and an abandoning of highest 29 hopes.” White, 803 F. Supp. 2d at 1098 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

21 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 29 of 33

1 4581276, at *8; see also Taifa v. Bayh, 846 F. Supp. 723, 728 (N.D. Ind. 1994) (same). 2 Plaintiff engaged in substantial informal discovery, reviewing Defendant’s financial 3 information and confirmatory third party sources, such as SPINS. Marron Decl. ¶¶ 6-8. 4 Plaintiff’s counsel also reviewed FDA guidance documents, the FDCA, FTC standards, 5 and background evidence relating to the Products’ claims – counsel for the Parties fully 6 briefed a motion to dismiss and were armed with the knowledge of the strengths and 7 weaknesses of their claims and defenses. See Dkt. Nos. 6, 7, 10-16. Thus, the Parties had 8 sufficient information to make an informed decision about the terms of the Settlement 9 Agreement. See id.; Marron Decl. ¶¶ 6-8. 10 f. The Experience and Views of Counsel 11 In contemplating the preliminary approval of a proposed settlement, “[t]he 12 recommendations of Plaintiff’s counsel should be given a presumption of reasonableness.” 13 Knight, 2009 WL 248367, at *4 (citing Boyd v. Bechtel Corp., 485 F. Supp. 610, 622 14 (N.D. Cal. 1979)); see also Nat’l Rural Telecomms. Coop., 221 F.R.D. at 528 (citing 15 Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326, 1330 (5th Cir. 1977)). Indeed, “Parties represented by 16 competent counsel are better positioned than courts to produce a settlement that fairly 17 reflects each party’s expected outcome in litigation.” In re Pacific Enters. Secs. Litig., 47 18 F.3d at 378. Thus, “the Court should not without good cause substitute its judgment for 19 [counsel’s].” Boyd, 485 F. Supp. at 622. Here, “[i]n addition to being familiar with the 20 present dispute, Plaintiff[s’] counsel has considerable expertise in . . . consumer and class 21 action litigation.” Knight, 2009 WL 248367, at *4; Marron Decl. ¶¶ 12-29; Ball Decl. ¶¶ 22 6-9. There is also nothing to counter the presumption that counsel’s recommendation is 23 reasonable. 24 g. The Reaction of the Class Members to the Proposed Settlement 25 At the preliminary approval stage, the reaction of the class to the proposed 26 settlement is not known because notice has not yet been distributed. As such, this factor is 27 not as meaningful a consideration as it may be at the fairness hearing, where Class 28 Members will have had a chance to object to the proposed settlement. Nevertheless, one 29

22 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 30 of 33

1 court has recognized that granting preliminary approval and directing notice to the class 2 when the class has not been certified prior to settlement may actually enhance the class 3 member’s opt-out rights. See In re Prudential Sec. Inc. Ltd. P’ships Litig., 163 F.R.D. 4 200, 205 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (“[A] settlement class in complex litigation . . . actually 5 enhances absent class members’ opt out rights because the right to exclusion is provided 6 simultaneously with the opportunity to accept or reject the terms of a proposed 7 settlement.”); In re Baldwin-United Corp., 105 F.R.D. 475, 481 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). The 8 Class Members in this case will benefit from the simultaneous class certification and 9 notice of proposed settlement. See id. Accordingly, this factor weighs in favor of 10 preliminary approval. 11 D. The Proposed Form of Class Notice and Notice Plan Satisfy the Requirements of 12 Rule 23 13 If the court’s prima facie review of the relief offered and notice provided by the 14 settlement are fair and adequate, it should order that notice be sent to the class. Manual 15 for Complex Litig., § 21.632 at 321. Notice of a class action settlement must be “the best 16 notice practicable under the circumstances, including individual notice to all members 17 who can be identified through reasonable effort.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). Here, 18 Defendant does not sell its Products directly to consumers, but only to third party retailers 19 and distributors, who sell the Products on store shelves. Thus, individual notice is not 20 possible; and notice by publication is the “best notice practicable under the 21 circumstances.” See id. 22 The proposed Notice and Notice Plan are adequate, constituting the best possible 23 notice under the circumstances. See Settlement Agreement, Exs. A-C, G. The Notices are 24 neutral, and written in an easy-to-understand clear language, giving consumers (1) basic 25 information about the lawsuit; (2) a description of the benefits provided by the settlement; 26 (3) an explanation of how Class Members can obtain settlement benefits; (4) an 27 explanation of how Class Members can exercise their right to opt-out or object to the 28 settlement; (5) an explanation that any claims against Defendant that could have been 29

23 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 31 of 33

1 litigated in this action will be released if the Class Member does not opt out; (6) the names 2 of counsel for the Class and information regarding attorney’s fees and incentive award; 3 (7) the fairness hearing date, along with an explanation of eligibility for appearing; and 4 (8) the settlement web site where additional information, including Spanish translations of 5 all forms, can be obtained. Id.; see also id. § 5.4.1. The Notices are also eye-catching, 6 and mirror the exemplar notices set forth in the Federal Judicial Center, Judges’ Class 7 Action Notice and Claims Process Checklist (2010). 8 The Notice Plan involves (1) creation of a dedicated Settlement Website, with 9 online claims form submission in 128-bit encryption, posted documents regarding the 10 case, and a downloadable claim form in English and Spanish; (2) a toll-free number that 11 potential Class Members may use to obtain further information, with live customer service 12 representatives and voice mail recording available 24-hours a day, all live for up to 12 13 months; (3) a dedicated postal mail box for paper claim forms; (4) online banner 14 advertising on Google Display Network, which includes national outlets such as 15 USAToday.com, Time.com, USNews.com, and regional outlets such as LATimes.com, 16 CBS2.com, FresnoBee.com, Fox5SanDiego.com, and targeted websites such as 17 WebMD.com and MensHealth.com; (5) a Facebook page dedicated to the Settlement; (6) 18 online banner advertising on Yahoo Display Network and MSN Display Network; (7) 19 posting the notice on TopClassActions.com and ClassActionRebates.com, two consumer 20 class action websites dedicated to spreading the word about class action settlements; (8) a 21 press release submitted to PR Newswire for distribution across the United States and 22 social media news outlets; (9) publication, 1/4 page size, once a week for four consecutive 23 weeks in the San Diego Union Tribune (including North County), sufficient to meet 24 CLRA requirements; (10) a full page ad in Prevention magazine (circulation of 2.9 million 25 persons); and (11) a 1/6 page ad in the New York Times (circulation 2.3 million persons). 26 Settlement Agreement, Ex. G. The online advertising efforts are estimated to generate 27 100 million impressions, meaning the number of times a person will be exposed to the 28 banner notice. The Summary Notice will be targeted to publications and websites that 29

24 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 32 of 33

1 consumers of homeopathic remedies are likely to read, and will direct consumers to the 2 Settlement Website for more information. Id. 3 The Parties have selected a qualified third-party Class Action Administrator with 4 particular expertise in targeted online notice, SEOmap, to disseminate the notice and 5 process claims. See id. (noting that SEOmap’s “clients collectively comprise more than 6 15% of U.S. internet traffic”). In light of the foregoing, the Court should approve the 7 form of Notice, the manner of notice in the Notice Plan, and the chosen Claims 8 Administrator. 9 E. The Proposed Timeline for Events Should Be Adopted 10 Event Date Preliminary Approval Granted Day 1 11 Class Settlement Website Activated On or before Day 15 12 Notice First Published in Print Sources Day 30 or as soon as reasonably possible after Order Granting Preliminary Approval 13 Class Counsel to File Motion for 45 days before Final Approval Hearing 14 Attorney’s Fees and Costs and Incentive Award 15 Last Day to Postmark Written Opt Out or 30 days before Final Approval Hearing Objection 16 Parties to File Motion for Final Approval 21 days before Final Approval Hearing 17 Final Approval Hearing As set by the Court (preferably 120 days after Order Granting Preliminary Approval 18 is entered) 19 Last Day to Submit a Claim Form 90 days after Final Judgment and Order 20 Accordingly, the parties request the Court schedule the Final Approval Hearing 21 120 days after the order granting preliminary approval, or as soon thereafter as practical. 22 IV. CONCLUSION 23 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court grant the relief 24 requested. 25 Dated: August 14, 2013 Respectfully Submitted,* 26 /s/ Ronald A. Marron RONALD A. MARRON 27 [email protected] 28 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. 29 MARRON, APLC

25 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-1 Filed 08/14/13 Page 33 of 33

SKYE RESENDES 1 ALEXIS M. WOOD 2 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, CA 92103 3 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 4 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665

5 Counsel for Plaintiff and the 6 Proposed Class 7 /s Matthew G. Ball 8 Matthew G. Ball 9 [email protected] K&L GATES LLP 10 4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 11 San Francisco, CA 94111 12 Phone: +1.415.249.1014 Fax: +1.415.882.8220 13 14 Attorneys for Defendant

15 * Counsel for Plaintiff, Ronald A. Marron, certifies that, pursuant to Section 2.f.4. of the 16 Court’s CM/ECF Administrative Policies, Defendant’s counsel, Matthew G. Ball, has reviewed the contents of this Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and 17 authorized placement of his electronic signature on this document. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

26 No. 12-cv-3056

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 148

1 LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC RONALD A. MARRON (175650) 2 [email protected] 3 SKYE RESENDES (278511) [email protected] 4 ALEXIS M. WOOD (270200) 5 [email protected] 651 Arroyo Drive 6 San Diego, California 92103 7 Telephone: (619) 696-9006 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 8 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC 13 on behalf of all others similarly situated Class Action 14 and the general public, DECLARATION OF RONALD A. 15 Plaintiff, MARRON IN SUPPORT OF JOINT 16 MOTION FOR ORDER (1) GRANTING PRELIMINARY

17 APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION v. SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING 18 SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING CLASS 19 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS 20 Corporation, COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 21 APPROVAL HEARING

22 Defendant. Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 23 Courtroom: 2D 24 25 26 27 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 148

1 I, Ronald A. Marron, declare: 2 1. I am counsel of record for Plaintiff Robert Mason and the putative class in 3 this action. I am a member in good standing of the State Bar of California and the 4 United States District Courts for the Northern, Central, Eastern and Southern Districts 5 of California; and of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 6 2. I submit this declaration in support of an Order (1) Granting Preliminary 7 Approval of the Class Action Settlement, (2) Certifying the Settlement Class, (3) 8 Appointing Robert Mason as Class Representative and the Law Offices of Ronald A. 9 Marron, APLC as Class Counsel, (4) Approving the Notice Plan, and (5) Setting the 10 Final Approval Hearing. I make this Declaration based on personal knowledge and if 11 called to testify, I could and would competently testify to the matters contained herein. 12 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the final 13 Settlement Agreement between the Parties, including exhibits thereto. 14 4. On February 6, 2013, on behalf of Mr. Mason and the putative class, I sent 15 Defendant a confidential, detailed demand letter, analyzing and justifying the 16 injunctive relief sought in this action. Thereafter, the parties engaged in five months of 17 negotiations to achieve the Settlement Agreement which is, in my opinion, the product 18 of vigorous, adversarial, and competent representation of the Parties; early contact 19 between counsel for the Parties to commence a dialog about the merits and risks of the 20 claims and defenses; and substantive negotiations throughout the pendency of this 21 litigation. 22 5. The settlement was reached with the assistance of an independent, 23 impartial mediator, the Honorable Leo S. Papas (Ret.) of Judicate West. Prior to 24 mediation, I discussed Plaintiff’s case with Judge Papas, and attended the formal, all 25 day mediation session before Judge Papas on April 23, 2013. Thereafter, the parties 26 continued to negotiate the material terms of the Settlement, both amongst counsel for 27 1 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 148

1 the Parties and returning to Judge Papas for guidance in negotiating issues on which 2 the Parties could not agree. 3 6. On July 30, 2013, after over five months of intense negotiations, the 4 Parties executed the Settlement Agreement. 5 7. In order to enter into a meaningful mediation, on March 25, 2013 and 6 continuing thereafter, Plaintiff requested Defendant produce copies of the Products’ 7 packaging and advertising; detailed financial statements and other relevant 8 information, such as distributors, amounts of sales to distributors, and units sales per 9 product/per year, the suggested retail price for the Products, wholesale price for the 10 Products, cost of goods sold, list of distributor, original sales invoices, and profit and 11 loss statements. 12 8. In response to Plaintiff’s request, by April 15, 2013, Defendant produced 13 Defendant’s sales data from Spins (a third party data-gathering firm) for years 2010- 14 2012; internal sales spreadsheets for sales in drug stores, internet, supermarkets and 15 sporting goods stores from 2009-2012 (which revealed that Defendant’s earned 16 approximately $7.5 million in revenue from the sale of the Products throughout the 17 United States during the Class Period); mechanicals of the Products’ labeling at issue; 18 advertising information; Products’ suggested retail sales prices; numerous research 19 studies pertaining to Traumeel; and a list of Heel’s distributors. In addition, Defendant 20 also produced original gross and net sales by product and customer for the first quarter 21 of 2009. After performing a detailed review of the 630-page spreadsheet for first 22 quarter sales of 2009, and comparing that data to financial data provided pre- 23 mediation, Plaintiff’s counsel concluded that Defendant’s pre-mediation figures were 24 accurate. Defendant also shared other confidential information through mediation, and 25 document production is on-going. 26 27 2 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 4 of 148

1 9. Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel are confident that the Settlement Fund and 2 broad injunctive relief agreed upon demonstrates a more than fair, reasonable, and 3 adequate result, and that the proposed Settlement merits preliminary approval. 4 10. In regard to injunctive relief, Defendant’s packaging of each Product is 5 the same throughout the United States and Defendant made uniform representations on 6 the Products’ labeling and advertising throughout the United States, including the “X” 7 dilution designation, and did not differentiate for any specific market or region. 8 11. Plaintiff’s Complaint contains seven potential causes of action. 9 Ronald A. Marron Firm’s Qualifications and Experience Prosecuting Consumer 10 Class Action Lawsuits 11 12. My work experience and education began in 1984 when I enlisted in the 12 United States Marine Corps (Active Duty 1984-1988, Reserves 1988-1990) and 13 thereafter received my Bachelor of Science in Finance from the University of Southern 14 California (1991). While attending Southwestern University School of Law (1992- 15 1994), I also studied Biology and Chemistry at the University of Southern California 16 and interned at the California Department of Corporations with emphasis in consumer 17 complaints and fraud investigations. I was admitted to the State Bar of California in 18 January of 1995 and have been a member in good standing since that time. In 1998, I 19 started my own law firm with an emphasis in consumer fraud. My firm currently 20 employs five full-time attorneys, two law clerks, three paralegals, and support staff. 21 13. Over the years I have acquired extensive experience in class actions and 22 other complex litigation and have obtained large settlements as lead counsel. In the 23 recent years, I devoted almost all of my practice to the area of false and misleading 24 labeling of food, nutrition or over-the-counter products. 25 14. My firm has an in-depth knowledge of litigating homeopathic remedy 26 cases, its history, principles and regulation. For example, in Gallucci v. Boiron, Inc., 27 3 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 5 of 148

1 Case No. 3:11-CV-2039 JAH NLS, United States District Court for the Southern 2 District of California, we drafted a Complaint with five potential causes of action, and 3 three of the claims, CLRA, UCL and FAL, with respect to OTC homeopathic drugs 4 “concern[ed] novel legal theories in a specialized area of law.” See Delarosa v. Boiron, 5 Inc., 275 F.R.D. 582, 590 n. 4 (C.D. Cal. 2011). This action involved extensive motion 6 practice and my firm’s opposition brief was so persuasive that defendants decided to 7 withdraw their motion. My firm’s well-drafted briefing, knowledge and experience 8 resulted in the February 27, 2012 settlement of Gallucci against French homeopathic 9 giant Boiron, Inc. On April 25, 2012, the Honorable John A. Houston granted 10 preliminary approval, noting that: 11 During the pendency of the Litigation, Class Counsel conducted an 12 extensive examination and evaluation of the relevant facts and law to assess 13 the merits of the named plaintiffs’ and class claims to determine how best to 14 serve the interests of Plaintiffs and the Class. . . . Class Counsel conducted 15 thorough review of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, its numerous changes 16 over the years, and the Act’s implementing regulations. Class Counsel have 17 carefully considered the merits of Plaintiffs’ claims, and the defenses raised 18 by defendants. 19 Gallucci Dkt. No. 89 at i. Accordingly, Judge Houston appointed my firm as Class 20 Counsel, finding that Class Counsel “will fairly and adequately protect the interests of 21 the Class . . . [and] are experienced and competent to prosecute this matter on behalf of 22 the Class.” Id. at iii-iv. The Fairness Hearing was held on October 1, 2012 and on 23 October 31, 2012, the court granted final approval. 24 15. In addition to Gallucci, and the present action, my firm is litigating 25 numerous other homeopathic or allegedly homeopathic drug labeling cases: 26 . Allen v. Hyland’s, Inc., Case No. 2:12-cv-1150-DMG (USC C.D. Cal.); 27 4 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 6 of 148

1 . Allen v. Similasan Corp., Case No. 3:12-cv-376-BTM-WMC (USC S.D. 2 Cal.); 3 . Allen v. Nelsons Bach USA Ltd., Case No. 3:12-cv-495-L-NLS (USC S.D. 4 Cal.); 5 . Nadler v. Nature’s Way Products, LLC, Case No. 5:13-cv-00100-TJH-OP 6 (USC C.D. Cal.); 7 . Mason v. Nature’s Innovation, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-3019-BTM-DHB 8 (USC S.D. Cal.); 9 . Roemmich v Hylands, Inc., Case No. 2:12-cv-6256-GHK-MRW (USC 10 C.D. Cal.); 11 . Nigh v. Humphreys Pharmacal, Inc. and Dickinson Brands, Inc., Case No. 12 3:12-cv-02714-MMA-DHB (USC S.D. Cal.) (Final Approval Hearing set 13 for October 21, 2013). 14 16. On March 13, 2012, my firm settled a case against manufacturers of OTC 15 probiotic supplement products, pending in the Southern District of California, styled 16 Burton v. Ganeden Biotech, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-01471 W NLS. Burton 17 alleged that defendants falsely advertised their products as containing “clinically 18 proven” proprietary bacteria that improved and benefitted the digestive and immune 19 health of individuals when, in fact, no clinical proof existed. Before this settlement was 20 finalized, my firm rejected defendants’ coupon settlement offer, because we did not 21 believe it constituted the best relief for the class members. Instead, we continued 22 extensive and lengthy rounds of negotiations with the defendants to obtain the best 23 result for the class. These months-long negotiations included back and forth exchange 24 of approximately twenty editions of the Settlement Agreement, multiple conference 25 calls (including on the weekends) and e-mails. On March 14, 2012, the parties filed a 26 Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement, (Dkt. No. 38) which the court 27 5 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 7 of 148

1 granted on April 16, 2012 (Id. at 42). After the Fairness Hearing in this case on August 2 21, 2012, Judge Whelan granted final approval on October 5, 2012. Dkt. Nos. 48, 52. 3 17. On March 1, 2012, the Honorable Janis L. Sammartino appointed my firm 4 Interim Class Counsel in an action styled Margolis et al. v. The Dial Corporation, et al., 5 currently pending in the United States District Court Southern District of California, 6 Case No. 3:12-cv-288-JLS-WVG (Dkt. No. 14). This case involves an OTC pheromone 7 soap product that its manufacturer alleges enhances a man’s sexual attraction to women. 8 18. When my firm was appointed Interim Lead Class Counsel for a class of 9 consumers in a deceptive labeling case back in March of 2011, the Honorable Marilyn 10 Huff recognized Class Counsel “appears to be well qualified to represent the interest of 11 the purported class and to manage this litigation.” Hohenberg v. Ferrero U.S.A., Inc., 12 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38471, at *6 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2011). Subsequently, when my 13 firm obtained certification of the proposed class, this court reaffirmed its finding that 14 my firm is adequate Class Counsel. See In re Ferrero Litig., 278 F.R.D. 552, 559 (S.D. 15 Cal. 2011). Judge Huff gave Final Approval of a settlement on July 9, 2012. Ferrero 16 Dkt. No. 127). 17 19. On November 14, 2011 my firm obtained the certification of a nationwide 18 class of consumers who purchased Qunol CoQ10, a dietary supplement making 19 misleading efficacy claims. See Bruno v. Quten Research Inst., LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. 20 LEXIS 132323 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2011). My firm then successfully defeated the 21 defendants’ motion to decertify the class following the Ninth Circuit’s decision in 22 Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012). See Bruno v. Eckhart 23 Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30873 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2012). The case recently 24 settled, on the eve of trial (originally scheduled for October 2, 2012). 25 20. On June 14, 2011, the Honorable Richard Seeborg appointed my firm 26 Interim Class Counsel, over a competing application from a former partner at the New 27 6 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 8 of 148

1 York law firm Milberg Weiss regarding a deceptive food labeling case. See Chacanaca 2 v. Quaker Oats Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65023, at *8-9 (N.D. Cal. June 14, 2011) 3 (“There is no question here that both the Weston/Marron counsel…have ample 4 experience handling class actions and complex litigation. It is also clear that both have 5 particular familiarity with suits involving issues of mislabeling in the food industry.”) 6 21. I was appointed class counsel in Peterman v. North American Company for 7 Life and Health Ins., et al., No. BC357194, (L.A. Co. Sup. Ct.), which was litigated for 8 over 4 years and achieved a settlement of approximately $60 million for consumers. In 9 granting preliminary approval of the settlement, the Hon. Carolyn B. Kuhl noted that 10 “the excellent work that the plaintiffs’ side has done in this case has absolutely followed 11 through to the settlement…The thought and detail that went into the preparation of 12 every aspect was very impressive to me.” Excerpts from Transcript of Dec. 21, 2009 13 Hearing, at 2:12-17, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. 14 22. I also served as class counsel in Clark v. National Western Life Insurance 15 Company, No. BC321681 (L.A. Co. Sup. Ct.), a class action that, after litigating the 16 case for well over 6 years, resulted in a settlement of approximately $25 million for 17 consumers. 18 23. In Iorio v. Asset Marketing, No. 05cv00633-IEG (CAB) (S.D. Cal.), I was 19 appointed class counsel on August 24, 2006, following class certification, which was 20 granted on July 25, 2006 by the Honorable Irma E. Gonzalez. Dkts. Nos. 113 and 121. 21 24. After nearly 6 years of intensive litigation, a settlement valued at $110 22 million was reached in Iorio, supra, and approved on March 3, 2011, by the Honorable 23 Janis Sammartino. Dkt. No. 480. Co-counsel and I successfully defended multiple 24 motions brought by defendant in the Southern District of California, including 25 “challenges to the pleadings, class certification, class decertification, summary 26 judgment,…motion to modify the class definition, motion to strike various remedies in 27 7 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 9 of 148

1 the prayer for relief, and motion to decertify the Class’ punitive damages claim,” plus 2 three petitions to the Ninth Circuit, attempting to challenge the Rule 23(f) class 3 certification. Iorio, Final Order Approving (1) Class Action Settlement, (2) Awarding 4 Class Counsel Fees and Expenses, (3) Awarding Class Representatives Incentives, (4) 5 Permanently Enjoining Parallel Proceedings, and (5) Dismissing Action with Prejudice, 6 entered on Mar. 3, 2011, at 6:9-15, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto 7 as Exhibit 3 (commenting that class counsel were “highly experienced trial lawyers 8 with specialized knowledge in insurance and annuity litigation, and complex class 9 action litigation generally” and “capable of properly assessing the risks, expenses, and 10 duration of continued litigation, including at trial and on appeal,” id. at 7:18-22). Judge 11 Sammartino also noted “the complexity and subject matter of this litigation, and the 12 skill and diligence with which it has been prosecuted and defended, and the quality of 13 the result obtained for the Class.” Id. at 17:25-27. 14 25. In Tabares v. Equitrust Life Ins. Co., No. BC390195 (L.A. Co. Sup. Ct.), 15 my firm obtained a class certification order and was appointed class counsel. The 16 action is still pending. 17 26. I am currently counsel in a number of additional putative class actions and 18 complex cases, including, but not limited to: 19 • Branca v. Iovate Health Sciences USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-1686- 20 LAB-WMC (USC S.D. Cal.) (supplement labeling case); 21 • In re Gerber Probiotic Sales Practices Litig., Case No. 2:12-cv-00835-JLL- 22 MAH (D.N.J.) (food labeling case); 23 • Red v. Kraft, Case No. 2:10-cv-01028-GW-AGR (USC, C.D. Cal.) (food 24 labeling case); 25 • Perez v. The J.M. Smucker Co., Case No. 3:12-cv-853-W-BGS (USC S.D. 26 Cal.) (food labeling case); 27 8 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 10 of 148

1 • Vinson v. The J.M. Smucker Co., Case No. 2:12-cv-04936-GHK-VBK (USC 2 C.D. Cal.) (food labeling case); 3 • Carr v. Tadin, Inc., Case No. 3:12-3010-JLS-JMA (USC S.D. Cal.) (labeling 4 case);

5 • Martinez v. Toll Brothers, et al., Case No. 09-cv-00937-CDJ (USC E.D. 6 Penn.) (recently settled); 7 • Vaccarino v. Midland National Life Insurance Co., Case No. CV 11-05858 8 CAS (MANx) (USC C.D. Cal.). 9 27. Besides these cases, I have also represented plaintiffs victimized in other 10 complex cases such as Ponzi schemes, shareholder derivative suits, and securities fraud 11 cases. I have litigated hundreds of lawsuits and arbitrations against major corporations; 12 of these, approximately 30 cases against the likes of, such corporate titans as Shell Oil, 13 Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch have gone through trial or 14 arbitration. Many more have settled on the eve of trial so that I was fully prepared to 15 proceed to trial. 16 28. My firm is fully committed to prosecuting this action against Defendant to 17 achieve a successful outcome for the proposed Class, and has the financial means to do 18 so. 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the 20 foregoing is true and correct. 21 Executed on this 5th day of August 2013 in San Diego, California. 22 /s/ Ronald A. Marron 23 Ronald A. Marron [email protected] 24 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 25 26 27 9 28 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 11 of 148

Table of Exhibits

EXHIBIT EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE NUMBERS NUMBER Exhibit 1 Final Settlement Agreement 1 – 109 between the Parties, including Exhibits Thereto Exhibit 2 Peterman v. North American 110 Company for Life and Health Ins., et al., No. BC357194, (L.A. Co. Sup. Ct.) Excerpts from Transcript of Dec. 21, 2009 Hearing, at 2:12- 17 Exhibit 3 Iorio v. Asset Marketing, No. 111 – 133 05cv00633-IEG (CAB) (S.D. Cal.) March 3, 2011 Order, at 6:9-15, 7:18-22 and 17:25-27

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 12 of 148

EXHIBIT 1 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 13 of 148

1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT A. MASON, individually and Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC on behalf all others similarly situated CLASS ACTION 12 and the general public, Filed: December 21, 2012 13 Plaintiff, CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 14 AGREEMENT 15 v.

16 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 17 Corporation,

18 Defendant. 19

20

21 22 This Class Action Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”) is made and 23 entered into by and between Plaintiff Robert A. Mason, the Representative Plaintiff 24 (“Mason” or “Plaintiff”), on behalf of himself and the Class in this action, and 25 Defendant Heel, Inc. (“Heel” or “Defendant”) to settle and compromise this action, 26 and settle, resolve, and discharge the Released Claims, as defined below, according 27 to the terms and conditions herein. 28 1

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 1

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 14 of 148

1 RECITALS 2 1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 3 1.1 WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed an action in the United States District 4 Court for the Southern District of California against Defendants, entitled Mason v. 5 Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC, bringing claims under California’s 6 Consumer Legal Remedies Act, (Civ. Code § 1750, et seq. [“CLRA”]), Unfair 7 Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. [“UCL”]), False Advertising 8 Law (id. § 17500, et seq. [“FAL”]), violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act 9 (15 U.S.C. § 2301, et seq. [“MMWA”]), and Breach of Express and Implied 10 Warranties. 11 1.2 WHEREAS, based upon the discovery taken to date, investigation, 12 and evaluation of the facts and law relating to the matters alleged in the pleadings, 13 plus the risks and uncertainties of continued litigation and all factors bearing on the 14 merits of settlement, Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to settle the claims 15 asserted in the Litigation pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 16 NOW THEREFORE, subject to the final approval of the Court as required 17 herein and by applicable law and rules, the Settling Parties hereby agree, in 18 consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and for other 19 good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, 20 that any Released Claims against any Released Parties shall be settled, 21 compromised and forever released upon the following terms and conditions. 22 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SETTLEMENT 23 1. DEFINITIONS 24 As used herein, the following terms have the meanings set forth below. 25 1.1. “CAFA Notice” means the notice of this settlement to the appropriate 26 federal and state officials in the United States, as provided by the Class Action 27 Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. § 1715, and as further described in Paragraph 5.5. 28 2

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 2

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 15 of 148

1 1.2. “Claim Form” means the document to be submitted by Claimants 2 seeking payment pursuant to this Agreement, attached as Exhibit A to this 3 Agreement. “Claim Form” shall encompass the English language version of the 4 form attached as Exhibit A, and all translations of the form into other languages, as 5 determined necessary by the Parties, with the assistance of the Class Action 6 Administrator. 7 1.3. “Claim-In Period” means the period of time from the date the Court 8 grants preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement, up to and including 9 ninety (90) calendar days after the Court grants final approval of the Agreement. 10 1.4. “Claimant” means a Class Member over the age of majority, unless 11 lawfully emancipated, or their parent or guardian if under the age of majority who 12 submits a claim for payment. 13 1.5. “Class” means all United States consumers who purchased 14 Defendants’ Products for household or personal use during the Class Period, as 15 more specifically defined in Paragraph 7.1 of this Agreement. 16 1.6. “Class Action Administrator” means the company jointly selected by 17 the Parties, SEOmap, and approved by the Court to provide notice to the Class, 18 CAFA Notice, and to administer the claims process. 19 1.7. “Class Period” means December 21, 2008 through the Opt-Out Date, 20 as designated by the Court in its Preliminary Approval Order. 21 1.8. “Class Counsel” means Mason’s counsel of record in the Litigation, 22 the Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron, APLC. 23 1.9. “Class Member” means a Person who falls within the definition of the 24 Class set forth in Paragraph 7.1. 25 1.10. “Court” means the United States District Court for the Southern 26 District of California. 27 1.11. “Defendant” means Heel, Inc. 28 3

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 3

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 16 of 148

1 1.12. “Defense Counsel” means Defendant’s counsel of record in the 2 Litigation, K&L Gates LLP. 3 1.13. “Dilution Disclaimer” means the injunctive relief provided for in 4 paragraph 4.1.2. 5 1.14. “Effective Date” means the first date by which any Judgment entered 6 pursuant to the Agreement becomes Final, except as specifically provided in 7 Section 9.2 of this Agreement. 8 1.15. “FDA” means the United States Food and Drug Administration. 9 1.16. “FDA Disclaimer” means the injunctive relief provided for in 10 paragraph 4.1.1. 11 1.17. “Final” means (a) if no appeal from the Judgment is filed, the date of 12 expiration of the time for the filing or noticing of any appeal from the Judgment; or 13 (b) if an appeal from the Judgment is filed, and the Judgment is affirmed or the 14 appeal dismissed, the date of such affirmance or dismissal; or (c) if a petition for 15 certiorari seeking review of any appellate judgment is filed and denied, the date the 16 petition is denied; or (d) if a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed and denied, the 17 date the petition is denied; or (e) if a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed and 18 granted, the date of final affirmance or final dismissal of the review proceeding 19 initiated by the petition for a writ of certiorari. Any proceeding or order, or any 20 appeal or petition for a writ of certiorari pertaining solely to any application for 21 attorneys’ fees or expenses will not in any way delay or preclude the Judgment 22 from becoming Final, and the Parties’ obligations as set forth in Section 9.2 are not 23 dependent on the Judgment becoming Final. 24 1.18. “Judgment” means the judgment to be entered by the Court pursuant 25 to the Settlement. 26 1.19. “Litigation” means Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056 GPC 27 (KSC), pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. 28 4

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 4

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 17 of 148

1 1.20. “Net Settlement Fund” shall mean the Settlement Fund, as defined 2 herein, less Class Action Administrator expenses, Notice expenses, any fee award, 3 reimbursement of Class Counsel’s expenses, and any incentive award. 4 1.21. “Notice” means a document, substantially in the form of Exhibit B 5 hereto (the “Long Form Notice”), and “Summary Notice” means a document 6 substantially in the form of Exhibit C hereto, to be disseminated in accordance 7 with the Preliminary Approval Order, informing Persons who fall within the Class 8 definition of, among other things, the pendency of the Litigation, the material 9 terms of the proposed Settlement and their options with respect thereto. 10 1.22. “Notice Plan” means the method of providing the Class with notice of 11 the Settlement, as approved by the Court. 12 1.23. “Opt-Out Date” means the date that is the end of the period to request 13 exclusion from the Class, as established by the Court in the Preliminary Approval 14 Order and set forth in the Notice and Section 8.7.1 of this Agreement. 15 1.24. “Parties” means the Representative Plaintiff and Defendant. 16 1.25. “Person” means an individual, corporation, partnership, limited 17 partnership, association, joint stock company, estate, legal representative, trust, 18 unincorporated association, government or any political subdivision or agency 19 thereof, any business or legal entity, and such individual’s or entity’s parents, 20 subsidiaries, spouse, heirs, predecessors, successors, representatives, and 21 assignees. 22 1.26. “Preliminary Approval Order” means an order, providing for, among 23 other things, preliminary approval of the Settlement and dissemination of the 24 Notice to the Class according to the Notice Plan. 25 1.27. “Products” means all existing products labeled “homeopathic,” 26 manufactured and/or distributed by Defendant and sold in the United States, per 27 the attached Exhibit D, in any variation, format, dosage, dilution, or packaging. 28 5

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 5

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 18 of 148

1 1.28. “Released Claims” means, with the exception of claims for personal 2 injury, any and all claims, demands, rights, suits, liabilities, and causes of action of 3 every nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, asserted or not 4 asserted, matured or unmatured, at law or in equity, existing under federal and/or 5 state law, including without limitation a waiver of all rights under Section 1542 of 6 the California Civil Code (or similar laws of other States), that the Representative 7 Plaintiff and/or any Class Member has or may have against the Released Persons 8 arising out of, in connection with, or related in any way, directly or indirectly, to 9 Defendant’s advertising, marketing, packaging, labeling, promotion, and/or sale of 10 the Products, that have been brought, could have been brought, or are currently 11 pending, by any Class Member against Released Persons, in any forum in the 12 United States (including territories and Puerto Rico). 13 1.29. “Released Persons” means Defendant, its respective parent 14 companies, any person or entity who purchases Heel’s assets in whole or in part, 15 subsidiary companies, affiliated companies, past, present, and future officers (as of 16 the Opt-Out Date), directors, shareholders, employees, predecessors, principals, 17 insurers, administrators, agents, accountants, consultants, advisers, independent 18 contractors, distributors, subcontractors, experts, servants, successors, trustees, co- 19 conspirators, buyers, attorneys, representatives, heirs, executors, and assigns of all 20 of the foregoing persons and entities. 21 1.30. “Representative Plaintiff” means Robert A. Mason. 22 1.31. “Settlement” means the settlement set forth in this Agreement. 23 1.32. “Settlement Fund” means the one million U.S. dollars ($1,000,000) 24 deposited by Defendant into the Settlement Fund described in Paragraph 4.2 of this 25 Agreement, and any interest earned thereon. 26 1.33. “Settling Parties” means, collectively, Defendant, the Representative 27 Plaintiff, and all Class Members. 28 6

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 6

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 19 of 148

1 1.34. The plural of any defined term includes the singular, and the singular 2 of any defined term includes the plural, as the case may be. 3 2. DENIAL OF WRONGDOING AND LIABILITY 4 Defendant denies the material factual allegations and legal claims asserted by 5 the Representative Plaintiff in the Litigation, including any and all charges of 6 wrongdoing or liability arising out of any of the conduct, statements, acts or 7 omissions alleged, or that could have been alleged, in the Litigation. Similarly, 8 this Agreement provides for no admission of wrongdoing or liability by Heel, its 9 past, present and future officers, directors, employees, shareholders, subsidiaries, 10 parents, affiliates, accountants, advisers, agents, contractors, legal counsel, 11 successors, heirs, and assigns. This Settlement is entered solely to eliminate the 12 uncertainties, burdens, and expenses of protracted litigation. 13 3. THE BENEFITS OF SETTLEMENT 14 Class Counsel and the Representative Plaintiff recognize and acknowledge the 15 expense and length of continued proceedings that would be necessary to prosecute 16 the Litigation through trial and appeals. Class Counsel also has taken into account 17 the uncertain outcome and the risk of any litigation, especially in complex actions 18 such as this Litigation, as well as the difficulties and delays inherent in such 19 litigation. Class Counsel is mindful of the inherent problems of proof under the 20 claims and possible defenses to the claims asserted in the Litigation. Class 21 Counsel believes that the proposed Settlement confers substantial benefits upon the 22 Class. Based on their evaluation of all of these factors, the Representative Plaintiff 23 and Class Counsel have determined that the Settlement is in the best interests of 24 the Representative Plaintiff and the Class. 25 26 27 28 7

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 7

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 20 of 148

1 4. SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATION 2 4.1. Injunctive Relief 3 Defendant will provide the Class with injunctive relief by way of 4 modification of the label and packaging for the Products as set forth in this 5 Agreement. Heel will implement the following modifications to its Products’ 6 packaging: 7 4.1.1. FDA Disclaimer: On each Product’s external packaging, Heel 8 will add the following disclaimer: “These statements have not been reviewed by 9 the Food and Drug Administration. They are supported by traditional homeopathic 10 principles.” In addition, the FDA Disclaimer will be included in all Heel 11 advertising to consumers that depicts a readable version of a Product’s label, and 12 all other Heel advertising to consumers that makes an Indication for Use-related 13 claim. Heel will make reasonable efforts to place this disclaimer on the same panel 14 that contains the “Drug Facts” box, but reserves the right to place it in another 15 location if space limitations make it impractical to place it there, but shall not place 16 it on the bottom of any packaging. Exemplars of the revised Product packaging are 17 attached hereto as Exhibit E. 18 4.1.2. Homeopathic Dilution Disclaimer: Heel will add the following 19 disclaimer to the back panel of each of its Products: “’X’ is a homeopathic dilution. 20 For more information, see [URL]” which will refer customers to a designated Heel 21 webpage for details (the “Dilution Webpage”). 22 4.1.3. Unless the Heel Product contains all natural ingredients, Heel 23 shall use the term “natural” in a manner that is appropriately qualified (e.g., by 24 using an asterisk that links to the phrase: “Contains [X] natural active ingredients 25 out of [X] actives, see Drug Facts”). Heel will make reasonable efforts to place 26 this disclaimer on the same panel that contains the “Drug Facts” box, but reserves 27 28 8

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 8

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 21 of 148

1 the right to place it in another location if space limitations make it impractical to 2 place it there, but shall not place it on the bottom of any packaging. 3 4.1.4. Heel will cease using the words “Clinically Proven,” “Proven 4 … Effective” or any similar representation that expressly or impliedly asserts 5 medical, scientific or clinical proof on any Products for which it does not have at 6 least two clinical studies performed by independent researchers that utilize 7 generally accepted protocols such as randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled 8 trials, with publication and peer review (“RCTs”). If any RCTs are sponsored by 9 Heel, Heel shall adequately disclose this fact to consumers. 10 4.1.5. Heel shall cease using the words “Doctor Recommended” and 11 “[U]sed by doctors worldwide” unless it also discloses to consumers the 12 percentage of those doctors who are homeopathic practitioners and the percentage 13 who are allopathic doctors or any other type of medical practitioners. 14 4.1.6. The FDA and Homeopathic Dilution Disclaimers will appear in 15 a legible font size and will be conspicuously displayed on the package, as 16 described above, in a readable font color, in comparison to any background 17 coloring on the package. In no event shall the FDA and Dilution Disclaimers be in 18 a font size smaller than any additional disclaimer Heel may include on its 19 packaging, nor shall the FDA and Dilution Disclaimers be featured any less 20 prominently than any other disclaimer Heel may include on its packaging, such as 21 through use of font color, placement on the packaging, or any other means of 22 emphasis. 23 4.1.7. Heel shall have eighteen (18) months after the date the 24 Settlement is finally approved to complete the labeling changes referred to in 25 Section 4.1 of this Agreement. The Parties understand that Heel may continue to 26 market and ship product stock with existing labeling for up to eighteen (18) months 27 following final approval, as contemplated by the eighteen month time period it will 28 9

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 9

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 22 of 148

1 take to complete the labeling changes as set forth herein, and that third-party 2 retailers and distributors may have on hand product stock in existing labeling for 3 some time after the Settlement is finally approved. 4 4.1.8. To the extent that any state and/or federal statute, regulation, 5 policies, and/or code may, in the future, impose other, further, different and/or 6 conflicting obligations or duties on Defendant with respect to the Products, this 7 injunctive relief shall cease as to Defendant’s conduct covered by that statute, 8 regulation, policy and/or code as of the effective date of such statute, regulation, 9 policy and/or code. For the avoidance of doubt, the Parties expressly understand 10 and agree that (i) Heel labels, such as those stating that a product provides 11 temporary relief for [X], are consistent with the Settlement and the release to be 12 provided in this Agreement and the Settlement is intended to protect the Released 13 Persons as to such labels and as to any “do not work” claims asserted in the 14 Litigation by any Class Member; and (ii) the current version of the FDA 15 Compliance Policy Guide (“CPG”) for homeopathic drugs (currently, CPG § 16 400.400) does not prevent Defendant from implementing the injunctive relief set 17 forth in this Agreement or preclude Defendant’s obligation to implement the 18 injunctive relief set forth in this Agreement. 19 4.1.9. Dilution Webpage. Heel agrees to add a Dilution Webpage that 20 is readily accessible from its home pages, each Product’s individual webpage, if 21 any, and directly from search engines. The Dilution Webpage will explain X 22 dilution in a manner that substantially conforms to the explanation provided by the 23 Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States (“HPUS”), in a language 24 understandable to the average consumer with no knowledge of homeopathy, such 25 as a question and answer format, explaining the level of homeopathic dilution and 26 method. The Dilution Webpage will also include a link to the FDA website for 27 CPG § 400.400, and shall appear substantially as set forth in Exhibit F. 28 10

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 10

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 23 of 148

1 4.2. Settlement Fund 2 4.2.1. Within ten (10) calendar days after the Court issues the 3 Preliminary Approval Order, Defendant will contribute a sum total of $1,000,000 4 (one million U.S. dollars) to the Settlement Fund, which will be non-recapture, i.e., 5 the Defendant shall have no ability to recover from the Settlement Fund any 6 amount it has paid into the Settlement Fund if the Settlement receives final Court 7 approval (including through any appeals). 8 4.2.2. The Settlement Fund shall be established and managed by the 9 Class Action Administrator, and deposited and maintained in an interest bearing 10 account with a federally insured, third party financial institution. All interest 11 accrued on the Settlement Fund shall inure to the benefit of the Class as set forth 12 herein. 13 4.2.3. Refunds provided under Section 4.3 will be paid from the Net 14 Settlement Fund. 15 4.3. Refunds to Class Members 16 4.3.1. The Settlement Fund shall provide, consistent with the 17 provisions below, for a refund regarding any of the Products purchased during the 18 Class Period by any member of the Class who makes a claim within the Claim-In 19 Period. Adequate and customary procedures and standards will be used by the 20 Class Action Administrator to prevent the payment of fraudulent claims and to pay 21 only legitimate claims. 22 4.3.2. The amount of the refund for any valid and timely-submitted 23 claim shall be determined as follows: 24 4.3.2.1. For any Claimant who provides proof of purchase (e.g., 25 dated receipt or original external packaging) (“Proof of 26 Purchase”), and swears or affirms under penalty of perjury 27 the accuracy of information contained in the Claim Form, 28 11

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 11

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 24 of 148

1 Claimant shall be entitled to a refund of the purchase price 2 claimed, up to $25.00 per Product purchased, subject to a 3 cap of $150.00 per Claimant for all claims; 4 4.3.2.2. For any Claimant who does not provide Proof of Purchase, 5 but who swears or affirms under penalty of perjury the 6 accuracy of the information contained in the Claim Form, 7 such Class Member will be entitled to a refund of the 8 purchase price claimed, up to $25.00 per Product, with a cap 9 of $100.00 per Claimant for all claims. 10 4.3.3. Payment will be made directly to the Class Member by first 11 class mail after entitlement to payment has been verified, and in no event more 12 than six months after the close of the Claim-In Period, unless Class Counsel 13 permits an extension of time. 14 4.3.4. The actual amount paid to individual Claimants will depend 15 upon the number of valid claims made, and payments to Class Members may be 16 subject to pro rata reduction if the aggregate number of claims exceeds the Net 17 Settlement Fund. 18 4.3.5. If all eligible Claims have been paid and funds remain in the 19 Net Settlement Fund following the close of the Effective Date, Class Counsel shall 20 direct the Class Action Administrator to distribute fifty (50) percent of any 21 remaining funds to a Court-approved non-profit organization or organizations 22 dedicated to informing consumers or advocating on consumers’ behalf about false 23 and deceptive drug labeling concerns, such as Consumers Union; and fifty (50) 24 percent to Claimants who submitted valid and timely claims as a supplemental pro 25 rata distribution. If the Court does not approve such a non-profit organization or 26 organizations dedicated to informing consumers or advocating on consumers’ 27 behalf about false and deceptive drug labeling concerns as a cy pres recipient, the 28 12

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 12

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 25 of 148

1 Parties agree that the fifty percent share designated for cy pres purposes shall go to 2 a non-profit organization that provides legal services on behalf of the indigent, as 3 set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure § 384. The remaining funds, if any, 4 shall not revert to Defendant. 5 5. ADMINISTRATION AND NOTICE 6 5.1. All costs and expenses of administering the Settlement and providing 7 Notice in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order (“Administrative 8 Costs”) shall be distributed from the Settlement Fund, as approved by the Court 9 through its approval of the Notice Plan. 10 5.2. Notice fees, costs and expenses incurred by the Class Action 11 Administrator shall not be chargeable to the Class and shall be borne solely by 12 Defendant if the Settlement does not receive preliminary or final approval. 13 5.3. Appointment and Retention of Class Action Administrator 14 5.3.1. The Parties shall jointly retain the Class Action 15 Administrator(s) (including subcontractors) to help implement the terms of the 16 Settlement Agreement. 17 5.3.2. The Class Action Administrator will facilitate the notice 18 process by assisting the Parties in the implementation of the Notice Plan, as well as 19 CAFA Notice, although Defendant shall retain ultimate responsibility for effecting 20 CAFA Notice within the required time. 21 5.3.3. The Class Action Administrator shall be responsible for 22 providing the Parties with assistance, as necessary, such as by preparing affidavits 23 of work it has performed with respect to implementing the Class Notice, and 24 providing regular updates to the Parties’ counsel about the status of the claims 25 process. 26 5.3.4. All fees, costs, and expenses of the Class Action Administrator 27 related to this Settlement will be paid from the Settlement Fund. 28 13

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 13

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 26 of 148

1 5.4. Class Settlement Website 2 5.4.1. The Class Action Administrator will create and maintain a class 3 settlement website (the “Class Settlement Website”), to be activated within fifteen 4 (15) calendar days of its receipt of the Preliminary Approval Order. The Class 5 Action Administrator’s responsibilities will also include securing an appropriate 6 URL, such as www.HeelClassActionSettlement.com or 7 www.TraumeelSettlement.com. The Class Settlement Website will contain 8 Settlement information and case-related documents such as the Agreement, the 9 Long-Form Notice, the Claim Form (in English and Spanish versions), the 10 Preliminary Approval Order, and notices from the Court. In addition, the Class 11 Settlement Website will include procedural information regarding the status of the 12 Court-approval process, such as an announcement of the Final Approval Hearing 13 date, as described in Section 8.1, when the Final Approval Order and Judgment 14 have been entered, and when the Effective Date has been reached, including any 15 appeal(s), if any. 16 5.4.2. The Class Settlement Website will terminate (be removed from 17 the internet) and no longer be maintained by the Class Action Administrator thirty 18 (30) days after either (a) the Effective Date or (b) the date on which the Agreement 19 is terminated or otherwise not approved by a court, whichever is later. The Class 20 Action Administrator will then transfer ownership of the URL to Defendant. 21 5.4.3. All fees, costs and expenses related to the Class Settlement 22 Website shall be distributed from the Settlement Fund. 23 5.5. CAFA Notice 24 5.5.1. The Parties agree that the Class Action Administrator shall 25 serve notice of the Settlement Agreement that meets the requirements of CAFA, 28 26 U.S.C. § 1715, on the appropriate federal and state officials no later than ten (10) 27 days after the filing of this Settlement Agreement with the Court. 28 14

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 14

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 27 of 148

1 5.5.2. Notwithstanding, Defendant shall have ultimate responsibility 2 to ensure that CAFA Notice is in fact effected consistent with the statutory 3 requirements. 4 5.5.3. All costs and expenses related to the CAFA Notice shall be 5 distributed from the Settlement Fund. 6 5.5.4. Defendant will file a certification with the Court stating the date 7 or dates on which the CAFA Notice was sent. Defendant will provide Class 8 Counsel with any substantive responses received in response to any CAFA Notice. 9 5.5.5. The Class Action Administrator shall also publish the Summary 10 Notice in a newspaper in a manner sufficient to meet California Government Code 11 § 6064 and Civil Code § 1781. 12 5.6. Notice Plan 13 5.6.1. The Class Notice shall conform to all applicable requirements 14 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States Constitution (including 15 the Due Process Clauses), and any other applicable law, and shall otherwise be in 16 the manner and form agreed upon by the Parties and approved by the Court. 17 5.6.2. No later than thirty (30) days after preliminary approval by the 18 Court of this Settlement, the Class Action Administrator shall commence providing 19 Notice to the Class according to the Notice Plan as attached in Exhibit G, except 20 that the Class Settlement Website shall require earlier publication, as discussed in 21 Section 5.4. 22 5.6.3. The Parties agree to the content of the Notices, substantially in 23 the forms attached to this Agreement as Exhibits B and C, and as approved by the 24 Court. 25 5.6.4. Within fourteen (14) calendar days after entry of the 26 Preliminary Approval Order, Defendant shall provide to the Class Action 27 Administrator complete e-mail or mail addresses of any direct consumer 28 15

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 15

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 28 of 148

1 purchasers of the Products that it possesses, for purposes of effecting direct notice 2 to potential Class Members. 3 5.6 Taxes 4 5.6.1 Class Members, Plaintiff and Class Counsel shall be 5 responsible for paying any and all federal, state, and local taxes due on any 6 payments made to them pursuant to the Settlement. 7 5.6.2 Taxes due in connection with the Settlement Fund and Net 8 Settlement Fund prior to distribution to the Class shall be paid by the Settlement 9 Administrator from the Net Settlement Fund. 10 6. RELEASES 11 6.1. Upon the Effective Date, the Representative Plaintiff and each of the 12 Class Members will be deemed to have, and by operation of the Judgment will 13 have, fully, finally, and forever released, relinquished, and discharged the Released 14 Persons from all Released Claims, meaning, with the exception of claims for 15 personal injury, any and all claims, demands, rights, suits, liabilities, and causes of 16 action of every nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, asserted or 17 nonasserted, matured or unmatured, at law or in equity, existing under federal 18 and/or state law, including without limitation a waiver of all rights under Section 19 1542 of the California Civil Code (or any similar state law), that the Representative 20 Plaintiff and/or Class Member has or may have against the Released Persons 21 arising out of, in connection with, or related in any way, directly or indirectly, to 22 Defendant’s advertising, marketing, packaging, labeling, promotion, manufacture, 23 sale and distribution of the Products, that have been brought, could have been 24 brought, or are currently pending, up to the date of the Effective Date, by any Class 25 Member against Released Persons, in any forum in the United States (including 26 their territories and Puerto Rico). 27 28 16

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 16

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 29 of 148

1 6.2. After entering into this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff or the Class 2 Members may discover facts other than, different from, or in addition to, those that 3 they know or believe to be true with respect to the Released Claims. Plaintiff and 4 the Class Members expressly waive and fully, finally, and forever settle and 5 release any known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, contingent or 6 noncontingent claim, whether or not concealed or hidden, without regard to the 7 subsequent discovery or existence of such other, different, or additional facts. 8 6.3. All Parties to this Settlement Agreement, including the Class 9 Members, specifically acknowledge that they have been informed by their legal 10 counsel, via the Notice, of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code (and any 11 similar State laws) and they expressly waive and relinquish any rights or benefits 12 available to them under this statute (and any similar State laws). California Civil 13 Code § 1542 provides: 14 A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE 15 CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR 16 SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING 17 THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY 18 HIM OR HER MUST HAVE 19 MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR. 20 21 6.4. Notwithstanding Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, or any 22 other federal or state statute or rule of law of similar effect, this Agreement shall be 23 given full force and effect according to each and all of its expressed terms and 24 provisions, including those related to any unknown or unsuspected claims, 25 liabilities, demands, or causes of action which are based on, arise from or are in 26 any way connected with the Litigation. 27 7. CLASS CERTIFICATION 28 17

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 17

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 30 of 148

1 7.1. The Parties agree that, for settlement purposes only, this Litigation 2 shall be certified as a class action pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 3 23(b)(3) or 23(b)(2), or both, with Representative Plaintiff as Class Representative 4 and Class Counsel as counsel for the Class, defined as follows:

5 All U.S. consumers who purchased the Products (listed in Exhibit D 6 to the Agreement) for household or personal use during the Class Period (as defined by Paragraph 1.7 of the Agreement) are included. 7 Excluded from the Class are: Heel; persons who during or after the 8 Class Period were officers or directors of Heel, or any corporation, trust or other entity in which Heel has a controlling interest; Heel 9 employees; the members of the immediate families of Heel employees 10 or their successors, heirs, assigns and legal representatives; and any judicial officer hearing this Litigation, as well as their immediate 11 family members and employees. 12 13 7.1.1. In the event the Settlement is terminated or for any reason the 14 Settlement is not effectuated, the certification of the Class shall be vacated and the 15 Litigation shall proceed as if the Class had not been certified. 16 8. SETTLEMENT HEARING 17 8.1. Promptly after execution of this Agreement, the Parties will submit 18 the Agreement together with its exhibits to the Court and will request that the 19 Court grant preliminary approval of the Settlement, as of the date of which the 20 Settlement shall be deemed “filed” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1715; issue 21 the Preliminary Approval Order; and schedule a hearing on whether the Settlement 22 should be granted final approval and whether Class Counsel’s application for fee 23 award and expenses, and for an incentive award to the Representative Plaintiff 24 (“Fee Application”) should be granted (“Final Approval Hearing”). The Parties 25 shall request the Court schedule the Fee Application to be filed no later than 26 fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Opt-Out Date, or sooner, if the Court 27 deems it necessary. 28 18

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 18

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 31 of 148

1 8.2. Defendant shall cooperate in good faith in Plaintiff’s preparation of 2 the joint motion for preliminary approval of the Settlement, which joint motion 3 may be filed on an ex parte basis, including by providing Class Counsel with then- 4 available details of the payment of the out-of-pocket costs of the injunctive relief 5 and other measures and relief such as the costs of changing the Products’ 6 packaging, implementing web site changes, and any and all other costs associated 7 with implementing the injunctive provisions of the Settlement Agreement. Heel 8 will further provide sworn affidavits of its appropriate corporate officers and 9 financial information at Mason’s reasonable request, provided that the Parties 10 agree such affidavits and information are reasonably necessary to obtain 11 preliminary and final approval of the Settlement. 12 8.3. Defendant shall not oppose Plaintiff’s assertion, in papers filed in 13 furtherance of this Settlement, that the Class satisfies each of the elements required 14 under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3): The Class is so 15 numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; there are questions of law 16 or fact common to the Class; the claims of Plaintiff Mason are typical of the Class; 17 Plaintiff and Class Counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the 18 Class; the questions of law of fact common to Class members predominate over 19 any questions affecting only individual members; and class treatment is the 20 superior means to adjudicate Plaintiff’s claims. 21 8.4. The Parties agree to the form and substance of the proposed 22 Preliminary Approval Order, attached hereto as Exhibit H, to be lodged with the 23 Court with the joint motion for preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement. 24 8.5. Procedures for Objecting to the Settlement 25 8.5.1. Class Members shall have the right to appear and show cause, if 26 they have any reason why the terms of this Agreement should not be given final 27 approval, subject to each of the sub-provisions contained in Paragraph 8.5. Any 28 19

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 19

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 32 of 148

1 objection to this Agreement, including any of its terms or provisions, must be in 2 writing, filed with the Court, with a copy served on Class Counsel, Defense 3 Counsel, and the Claims Administrator at the addresses set forth in the Notice, and 4 postmarked no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Final Approval 5 Hearing date. Class Members may object either on their own or through an 6 attorney hired at their own expense. 7 8.5.2. If a Class Member hires an attorney to represent him or her at 8 the Final Approval Hearing, he or she must do so at his or her own expense. No 9 Class Member represented by an attorney shall be deemed to have objected to the 10 Agreement unless an objection signed by the Class Member is also filed with the 11 Court and served upon Class Counsel, Defense Counsel, and the Class Action 12 Administrator at the addresses set forth in the Notice thirty (30) days before the 13 Final Approval Hearing. 14 8.5.3. Any objection regarding or related to the Agreement shall 15 contain a caption or title that identifies it as “Objection to Class Settlement in 16 Mason v. Heel Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056 GPC (KSC)” and also shall contain 17 information sufficient to identify and contact the objecting Class Member (or his or 18 her attorney, if any), as well as a clear and concise statement of the Class 19 Member’s objection, documents sufficient to establish the basis for their standing 20 as a Class Member, i.e., verification under oath as to the approximate date(s) and 21 location(s) of their purchase(s) of the Products, the facts supporting the objection, 22 and the legal grounds on which the objection is based. Any objections not 23 submitted to the Court at least thirty (30) days prior to the Final Approval Hearing 24 are deemed waived. If an objecting party chooses to appear at the hearing, that 25 party must file with the Court, at least thirty (30) days before the Final Approval 26 Hearing, a notice of intent to appear and that notice must list the name, address and 27 telephone number of the attorney, if any, who will appear on behalf of that party. 28 20

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 20

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 33 of 148

1 8.5.4. Any Class Member who does not object to the Agreement, or 2 who does not opt out in compliance with the opt out provision in paragraph 8.7 3 below, is deemed to be a Class Member and bound by the Agreement upon final 4 approval of the Settlement. 5 8.6. Right to Respond to Objections 6 Class Counsel and Defendant shall have the right, but not the obligation, to 7 respond to any objection, by filing opposition papers no later than seven (7) 8 calendar days prior to the Final Approval Hearing, or on such other date as set 9 forth in the Preliminary Approval Order, or any subsequent Court order(s) 10 modifying the briefing schedule for the Final Approval Hearing. The Party 11 responding shall file a copy of the response with the Court, and shall serve a copy, 12 by regular mail, hand or overnight delivery, in the Party’s discretion, to the 13 objector (or counsel for the objector), Class Counsel and Defense Counsel, to the 14 extent the objector or their counsel do not receive notice of electronic filing via the 15 Court’s ECF filing system. 16 8.7. Opt Outs 17 8.7.1. Any Class Member who does not wish to participate in the 18 Settlement must write to the Class Action Administrator, stating an intent to be 19 “excluded” from this Settlement (“Request for Exclusion”). The written Request 20 for Exclusion must be sent via first class United States mail to the Class Action 21 Administrator at the address set forth in the Class Notice and postmarked no later 22 than thirty (30) calendar days before the date set for the Final Approval Hearing 23 (“Opt-Out Date”). The Request for Exclusion must be personally signed by the 24 Class Member and may only be on behalf of such signing Class Member. So- 25 called “mass” or “class” opt-outs shall not be allowed. 26 8.7.2. Any Class Member who does not request exclusion from the 27 Settlement has the right to object to the Settlement. Any Class Member who 28 21

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 21

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 34 of 148

1 wishes to object must timely submit an objection, as set forth in Section 8.5 above. 2 If a Class Member submits an objection and a written Request for Exclusion, he or 3 she shall be deemed to have complied with the terms of this Opt-Out procedure 4 and shall not be bound by the Agreement if approved by the Court. However, any 5 objector who has not timely requested exclusion from the Settlement will be bound 6 by the terms of the Agreement upon final approval of the Settlement. 7 9. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES AND INCENTIVE AWARD 8 9.1. In accord with F.R.C.P. 23(h) and relevant case law, Plaintiff will 9 petition the Court for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and a Class Representative 10 incentive award. Defendant shall not object or oppose any such petition, including 11 by contesting any fees, expenses, or incentive award requested, to the extent the 12 petition does not request more than $3,500 as an incentive award for the Class 13 Representative or thirty percent (30%) of the value of the Settlement to the Class 14 as Class Counsel’s attorneys’ fees. 15 9.2. Upon appropriate Court Order so providing, any attorneys’ fees and 16 costs awarded to Class Counsel by the Court shall be paid to Class Counsel from 17 the Settlement Fund within five (5) calendar days of the date of the order (“Fee 18 Award”), notwithstanding the existence of any timely filed objections thereto, or 19 appeal (actual or potential) therefrom, or collateral attack on the Settlement or any 20 part thereof, subject to Class Counsel’s obligation to make appropriate refunds or 21 repayments to the Settlement Fund plus interest at the same rate earned on the 22 Settlement Fund, if and when, as a result of any appeal and/or further proceedings 23 on remand, or successful collateral attack, the fee or cost award is reduced or 24 eliminated. 25 9.3. Heel shall bear its own attorney’s fees and costs. Heel bears all risk 26 of an objector’s success except with respect to the amount of the Fee Award as set 27 forth above. 28 22

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 22

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 35 of 148

1 9.4. Any incentive payment awarded by the Court to the Class 2 Representative will be paid from the Settlement Fund. 3 9.5. If so ordered by the Court upon preliminary or final approval, Class 4 Counsel shall be entitled to provisional reimbursement from the Settlement Fund 5 of 100% of its expenses incurred, including retention of experts and other 6 expenses, subject to the Class Counsel’s obligation to make appropriate refunds or 7 repayments to the Settlement Fund, plus interest at the same rate as earned on the 8 Settlement Fund, if, and when, as a result of any order, the final expense award is 9 lower than that amount. 10 10. MOTION FOR FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER 11 10.1. In accord with the Court’s schedule for the Final Approval Hearing, as 12 set in the Preliminary Approval Order, the Class Representative shall file a motion 13 for final approval of the Settlement Agreement, in consultation with Defendant, 14 and Defendant agrees not to oppose such motion. 15 10.2. Defendant shall cooperate in good faith with Plaintiff’s preparation of 16 the motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement, including by providing 17 Class Counsel with then-available details of the payment of the out-of-pocket costs 18 of the injunctive relief and other measures and relief such as the costs of changing 19 the Products’ packaging, implementing web site changes, and any and all other 20 costs associated with implementing the injunctive provisions of the Agreement; 21 and providing signed declaration(s) of appropriate corporate officers of Heel if the 22 Parties, in good faith, deem such declaration(s) reasonably necessary. 23 10.3. Defendant shall not oppose Plaintiff’s assertion, in papers filed in 24 furtherance of the Settlement Agreement, that the Court should affirm its rulings 25 granting Preliminary Approval of the Settlement and grant final approval of the 26 Settlement. 27 28 23

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 23

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 36 of 148

1 10.4. The Parties agree to the form and substance of the proposed Final 2 Judgment and Order, attached hereto as Exhibit I, to be lodged with the Court with 3 the motion for final approval of the Settlement Agreement. 4 11. CONDITIONS FOR EFFECTIVE DATE; EFFECT OF 5 TERMINATION 6 11.1. The Effective Date of this Agreement shall be the date the Judgment 7 has become Final, as defined in Paragraph 1.167. 8 11.2. If this Agreement is not approved by the Court or the Settlement is 9 terminated or fails to become effective in accordance with the terms of this 10 Agreement, the Settling Parties will be restored to their respective positions in the 11 Litigation as of the date the Motion for Preliminary Approval was filed. In such 12 event, except with respect to the Class Action Administrator’s fees, costs and 13 expenses as provided in Section 5 herein, the terms and provisions of this 14 Agreement will have no further force and effect with respect to the Settling Parties 15 and will not be used in this Litigation or in any other proceeding for any purpose, 16 and any Judgment or order entered by the Court in accordance with the terms of 17 this Agreement will be treated as vacated. 18 11.3. No order of the Court or modification or reversal on appeal of any 19 order of the Court concerning any award of attorneys’ fees, expenses, or costs to 20 Class Counsel; incentive award to the Class Representative; or cy pres use of 21 leftover settlement funds will constitute grounds for cancellation or termination of 22 this Agreement. 23 12. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 24 12.1. The Parties acknowledge that it is their intent to consummate this 25 Agreement, and they agree to cooperate to the extent reasonably necessary to 26 effectuate and implement all terms and conditions of this Agreement and to 27 28 24

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 24

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 37 of 148

1 exercise their best efforts to accomplish the foregoing terms and conditions of this 2 Agreement. 3 12.2. The Parties intend the Settlement to be a final and complete resolution 4 of all disputes between them with respect to the Litigation. The Settlement 5 compromises claims that are contested and will not be deemed an admission by 6 any Settling Party as to the merits of any claim or defense. 7 12.3. The Parties agree that the consideration provided to the Class and the 8 other terms of the Settlement were negotiated at arms’ length, in good faith by the 9 Parties, and reflect a settlement that was reached voluntarily, after consultation 10 with competent legal counsel, and with the extensive assistance of an independent, 11 neutral mediator, Hon. Leo S. Papas (Ret.). The Litigation was filed in good faith, 12 was not frivolous and was in compliance with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil 13 Procedure. This Agreement is entered solely to eliminate the uncertainties, 14 burdens and expenses of protracted litigation. 15 12.4. Neither this Agreement nor the Settlement, nor any act performed or 16 document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of this Agreement or the 17 Settlement is or may be deemed to be or may be used as an admission of, or 18 evidence of, the validity of any Released Claims, or of any wrongdoing or liability 19 of Defendant or any other Released Person; or is or may be deemed to be or may 20 be used as an admission of, or evidence of, any fault or omission of Defendant or 21 any other Released Person in any civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding in 22 any court, administrative agency or other tribunal. Any party to this Litigation or 23 any other Released Person may file this Agreement and/or the Judgment in any 24 action that may be brought against it in order to support any defense or 25 counterclaim, including without limitation those based on principles of res 26 judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or 27 28 25

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 25

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 38 of 148

1 reduction, or any other theory of claim preclusion or issue preclusion or similar 2 defense or counterclaim. 3 12.5. All agreements made and orders entered during the course of the 4 Litigation relating to the confidentiality of information will survive this 5 Agreement. 6 12.6. Any and all Exhibits to this Agreement are material and integral parts 7 hereof and are fully incorporated herein by this reference. 8 12.7. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written 9 instrument signed by or on behalf of all Parties or their respective successors-in- 10 interest. 11 12.8. This Agreement and any exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire 12 agreement among the Parties, and no representations, warranties, or inducements 13 have been made to any Party concerning this Agreement or its exhibits other than 14 the representations, warranties, and covenants covered and memorialized in such 15 documents. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Parties will bear their own 16 respective costs. 17 12.9. Class Counsel, on behalf of the Class, is expressly authorized by the 18 Representative Plaintiff to take all appropriate action required or permitted to be 19 taken by the Class pursuant to this Agreement to effectuate its terms, and is 20 expressly authorized to enter into any modifications or amendments to this 21 Agreement on behalf of the Class that Class Counsel deems appropriate. 22 12.10. The Plaintiff will not object to motions filed by Defendant seeking to 23 continue the obligation to respond to the Complaint, or any amendments thereto, 24 during the pendency of Settlement-related proceedings. 25 12.11. Each counsel or other Person executing this Agreement or any of its 26 Exhibits on behalf of any Party hereby warrants that such Person has the full 27 authority to do so. 28 26

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 26

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 39 of 148

1 12.12. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts. All 2 executed counterparts and each of them will be deemed to be one and the same 3 instrument. A complete set of original counterparts will be filed with the Court. 4 12.13. This Agreement will be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the 5 successors and assigns of the Settling Parties. 6 12.14. Except as provided in Paragraph 4.1.8, the Court will retain 7 jurisdiction with respect to implementation and enforcement of the terms of this 8 Agreement, and all parties hereto submit to the jurisdiction of the Court for 9 purposes of implementing and enforcing the Settlement. 10 12.15. None of the Settling Parties, or their respective counsel, will be 11 deemed the drafter of this Agreement or its exhibits for purposes of construing the 12 provisions thereof. The language in all parts of this Agreement and its exhibits will 13 be interpreted according to its fair meaning, and will not be interpreted for or 14 against any of the Settling Parties as the drafter thereof. 15 12.16. This Agreement shall be deemed the “proposed agreement” filed with 16 the Court within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1715 as of the date on which 17 preliminary approval is granted by the Court. 18 12.17. The Settlement is not conditioned on Court approval of Mason’s 19 allocation of recovery amounts among various claimants or Court approval of 20 Mason’s request for attorneys’ fees and expenses or incentive award. 21 12.18. This Agreement and any exhibits hereto will be construed and 22 enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the internal, substantive laws of the 23 State of California without giving effect to that State’s choice-of-law principles. 24 Any provision of California Evidence Code § 1115-1128 notwithstanding, this 25 Agreement may be enforced by any Party hereto by a motion under Code of Civil 26 Procedure § 664.6 or by any other procedure permitted by California law. The 27 provisions of the confidentiality agreement entered into with respect to the 28 27

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 27

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 40 of 148

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 28 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 41 of 148

1 APPROVED ASlO FORM AND CONT~~: . 2 Dated: J /M !.? ,/~ 1/ ~··· / / Ronald A. Marron 3 / LAW OFFICES OF RONALD MARRON, 4 APLC Attorneys for Plaintiff Robert Mason and the 5 Class 6 7 Dated: ------Matthew G. Ball 8 K&L Gates LLP Attorneys for Defendant Heel, Inc. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 29 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 42 of 148

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 30 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 43 of 148

1 EXHIBIT LIST

2 Exhibit A Claim Form 3 Exhibit B Long Form Notice to Class Members 4 5 Exhibit C Summary Notice to Class Members

6 Exhibit D Product List 7 Exhibit E Exemplars of Revised Product Packaging 8 9 Exhibit F Exemplars of Revised Website

10 Exhibit G Notice Plan 11 Exhibit H Proposed Preliminary Approval Order 12 13 Exhibit I Proposed Final Judgment and Order 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30

Mason v. Heel, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 31

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 44 of 148

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 32 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 45 of 148

MUST BE POSTMARKED NO LATER THAN [Date XX, 2013]

[DRAFT] CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT CLAIM FORM

You must complete this Claim Form in its entirety using blue or black ink. Please print all information clearly. This Claim Form only relates to qualifying purchases of homeopathic products manufactured or distributed by Heel and labeled “homeopathic” (a “Heel Homeopathic Product”). A qualifying purchase means you purchased the Heel Homeopathic Product between December 21, 2008 and [DATE]. Do not complete this Claim Form if you did not make a qualifying purchase of a Heel Homeopathic Product. All information requested on this Claim Form is required. Proof(s) of purchase is required only if you have proof (such as receipt or external packaging), for each purchase that you claim.

You may submit only one Claim Form, and two people cannot submit Claim Forms for the same qualifying purchase of a Heel Homeopathic Product. All Claim Forms must be postmarked by [month, day, year]. Mail your fully completed and signed Claim Form and, where available, the required proof(s) of purchase of a Heel Homeopathic Product to: Heel Claim Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063.

CLAIMANT INFORMATION

All of the information below is required. If you do not provide all of the information below, your claim may be denied.

NAME:______

TELEPHONE NUMBER:______

EMAIL ADDRESS:______

ADDRESS:______

CITY:______STATE: ______ZIP CODE: ______

CLAIM INFORMATION

All of the information below is required. You must provide the information in the table below for each purchase of a Heel Homeopathic Product(s). (If additional space is needed, please submit on a separate sheet, and attach that sheet to your completed claim form.) If available, you must provide proof of each purchase you list below. If you cannot provide proof of a particular purchase, you may still submit your claim as detailed below. For each purchase that is the subject of a claim, there is a limit of up to $25.00 per Heel Homeopathic Product. For that reason, you must state the known or estimated purchase price. If you do not provide all of the information below, your claim may be denied.

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 33 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 46 of 148

QUALIFYING PURCHASES OF HEEL HOMEOPATHIC PRODUCTS

PRODUCT NAME DATE OF PURCHASE PURCHASE PRICE STORE NAME AND PROOF OF (BETWEEN DECEMBER 21, LOCATION (CITY/STATE) PURCHASE 2008 AND M/D/YYYY) ATTACHED?

PROOF OF PURCHASE

If available, proof of purchase is required for each qualifying purchase of a Heel Homeopathic Product listed above. Include your proof(s) of purchase, sign the Certification Under Penalty of Perjury below, and mail the fully completed and signed Claim Form to: Heel Claim Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063. There is a limit of $150.00 per claimant for claims containing proof(s) of purchase.

NO PROOF OF PURCHASE

If you do not have a proof of purchase, you may submit a claim for Heel Homeopathic Product(s) you purchased by completing the Claim Information table above to the best of your knowledge and signing the below Certification Under Penalty of Perjury. Non-proof-of-purchase claims will be processed after claims that are submitted with a proof of purchase. Non-proof of purchase claims are subject to a $100.00 per claimant limit, and may be reduced based on the number of claims received.

CERTIFICATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury, as follows:

a) All of the information on this Claim Form is true and correct;

b) If I have proof of a qualifying purchase of any Heel Homeopathic Product(s) that I have listed on this Claim Form, I am providing such proof with the submission of this Claim Form. If I do not have a proof of purchase for a qualifying purchase listed on this Claim Form, I certify that I purchased the product for which I submit the claim and I have estimated the purchase price in good faith.

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 34 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 47 of 148

c) I understand that the Claim Administrator may contact me to verify any of the information that I have provided on this Claim Form or to verify any of the proofs of purchase that I have submitted with this Claim Form; and

d) I understand that the decision of the Claim Administrator is final and binding on me.

Signature: ______

Printed Name: ______

Date: ______

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 35 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 48 of 148

EXHIBIT B

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 36 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 49 of 148 DETAILED NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Mason v. Heel, Inc. Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC If you purchased a product manufactured or distributed by Heel labeled “homeopathic,” such as Traumeel or Zeel, you may be entitled to a cash refund from a class action settlement. A federal court authorized notice of this settlement. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS IN THIS SETTLEMENT SUBMIT THE CLAIM FORM The only way to get a cash refund. EXCLUDE YOURSELF Get out of the lawsuit and the settlement. Get no cash refund. OBJECT OR COMMENT Write the Court about why you do, or do not, like the Settlement. DO NOTHING You will get no cash refund and you give up your rights. Your rights and options – and the deadlines to exercise them – are explained in this notice. Para una notificación en Español, llamar (___) ____ o visitar 1. What is this notice and why should I read it? This Detailed Notice advises you of a proposed class action settlement in a lawsuit entitled Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056- GPC-KSC (the “Action”), brought on behalf of the Class, and pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. You need not live in California to get a benefit under the Settlement. The Settlement resolves a lawsuit over whether Heel, Inc. (“Heel” or “Defendant” falsely or deceptively labeled and marketed Heel homeopathic products which are sold in the United States (the “Products”). Defendant stands by its labeling and marketing and deny it did anything wrong. You should read this entire Detailed Notice carefully because your legal rights are affected whether you act or not. A listing of the Products involved in this lawsuit is available at www.XXXX.com. The Court has granted preliminary approval of the Settlement and has set a final hearing to take place on ______, 2013 at ______.m. in the Courtroom of the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel, United States District Court for the Southern District of California, to determine if the Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, and to consider the request by Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses, and an incentive award for the class representative. 2. What is a class action lawsuit and what is this lawsuit about? A class action is a lawsuit in which one or more plaintiffs sue on behalf of themselves and other people who may have similar claims. In this case, Plaintiff is Robert A. Mason. The Defendant is Heel, Inc. Together, Plaintiff and Defendant are referred to in this notice as the “Parties.” Defendant is the manufacturer and/or distributor of multiple homeopathic drugs, such as Traumeel and Zeel, which are advertised to provide relief for symptoms of common ailments including but not limited to pain relief remedies. This Settlement involves all existing homeopathic products manufactured and/or distributed by Defendant and sold in the United States, in any variation, format, dosage, dilution or package, from December 21, 2008 to [DATE]. Again, a listing of the Products involved in this lawsuit is available at www.XXXX.com. Plaintiff has decided to settle the claims against the Defendant on behalf of all members of the Class by entering into a written settlement agreement called the “Settlement Agreement.” The individuals on whose behalf the Settlement has been made are called “Class Members.” The individuals who make up the Class (i.e. the Class Members) are described in Question No. 4 below. The Settlement has already been preliminarily approved by the Court. Nevertheless, because the settlement of a class action determines the rights of all members of the proposed class, the Court in which this lawsuit is pending must give final approval to the Settlement before it can take effect. The Court has conditionally certified the Class for settlement purposes only, so that members of the Class can be given notice and the opportunity to (i) exclude themselves from the Class, (ii) voice their support or opposition to final approval of the Settlement, and (iii) learn how to submit a Claim Form to get the relief offered by the Settlement. If the Settlement is not given final approval by the Court, or the Parties terminate it, the Settlement will be void, and the Action will continue as if there had been no Settlement and no certification of the Class. 3. Why is there a settlement? The Court has not decided in favor of either side in the case. Defendant denies all allegations of wrongdoing or liability against it and asserts that its conduct was lawful. Defendant is settling to avoid the expense, inconvenience, and inherent risk and disruption of litigation. Plaintiff and his attorneys believe that the Settlement is in the best interests of the Class because it provides an appropriate recovery for Class Members now while avoiding the risk, expense, and delay of pursuing the case through trial and any appeals.

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 37 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 50 of 148 4. Who is included in the settlement? The Class covered by the Settlement is defined as follows: All persons in the United States who purchased the Products (as defined in Exhibit D of the Agreement) for personal or household use from December 21, 2008 to the Opt Out/Objection Deadline (as set by the Court and defined in paragraphs 8.5 and 8.7 of the Agreement) (“the Class Period”). Excluded from the Class are Defendant; and persons who during or after the Settlement Period were officers or directors of Defendant, or any corporation, trust or other entity in which any Defendant has a controlling interest; and the members of the immediate families of Defendant’s employees or their successors, heirs, assigns and legal representatives; any judicial officer hearing this Action, and their family members and employees. 5. What does the settlement provide? A. Payments to Class Members. Defendant will pay a sum total of $1,000,000 for (i) valid claims submitted by Class Members, (ii) Class Counsel’s attorneys’ fees and expenses, (iii) an incentive award to Plaintiff for his efforts in bringing the Action, (iv) costs of notice and claims administration, and (v) any applicable taxes. Any of the $1,000,000 remaining after payment of all claims, attorneys’ fees and expenses, incentive award, and taxes will be distributed fifty (50) percent to a Court-approved non-profit organization dedicated to informing and advocating on behalf of consumers regarding drug labeling concerns, such as Consumers Union, or a non-profit organization that provides legal services on behalf of the indigent, as set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 384; and fifty (50) percent to Class Member Claimants as a supplemental distribution. If you are a member of the Class (defined in the answer to Question No. 4 above), and you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you can submit a claim to receive a cash payment. Claims Submitted With Proof of Purchase: If you are able to provide proof of purchase from any retailer in the United States (e.g., receipt or packaging) (“Proof of Purchase”), you may submit a claim which will entitle you to a refund of the purchase price up to a maximum of $25.00 per Product, subject to a cap of $150.00 per Class Member. Claims Submitted Without Proof of Purchase: If you are unable to provide Proof of Purchase but swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that you purchased a Product during the Class Period, you may submit a claim for the purchase price of the Product as sworn to on the claim form, up to a maximum of $25.00 per Product, with a cap of $100.00 per household. Process: To be eligible for a payment pursuant to the Settlement, a Class Member must submit a claim that (i) is postmarked (or dated, if submitted online) by the Claim Filing Deadline, which will be ninety (90) days after the date the Court enters a judgment granting final approval, and (ii) contains all of the required information and documentation set forth in the claim form. You can file a claim form online or download a claim form by going to www.XXXX.com and following the instructions provided. You can also get a claim form by writing to the Heel Claims Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063. If the aggregate number of claims exceeds the Net Settlement Fund, payments to Class Members may be subject to pro rata reduction. B. Injunctive Relief. If the Settlement is approved at the Final Approval Hearing, Heel will modify the labels and packaging for the Products and Heel’ web pages as described below on a rolling basis to be completed within eighteen (18) months of the date the Settlement becomes Final (the “Effective Date”). Packaging Modifications: (i) FDA Disclaimer: Defendant will include the following language on the same outer label or package panel that bears the Drug Facts box: “These statements have not been reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration. They are supported by traditional homeopathic principles.” (ii) Dilution Disclaimer: The back panel of each Product’s outer label or package shall be modified to include the following language: “X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, www.[URL created per Settlement Agreement].” (iii) “Natural” claims: Unless the Product contains all natural ingredients, Heel shall use the term “natural” in a manner that is appropriately qualified (e.g., by using an asterisk that links to the phrase: “Contains [X] natural active ingredients out of [X] actives, see Drug Facts”). (iv) “Clinically Proven” claims: Heel will cease using the words “Clinically Proven,” “Proven … Effective” or any similar representation that expressly or impliedly asserts medical, scientific or clinical proof on any Products for which it does not have at least two clinical studies performed by independent researchers that utilize generally accepted protocols such as randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials, with publication and peer review; further, if any clinical trial are sponsored by Heel, Heel shall adequately disclose this fact to consumers. (v) “Doctor Recommended” claims: Heel shall cease using the words “Doctor Recommended” and “[U]sed by doctors worldwide” unless it also discloses to consumers the percentage of those doctors who are homeopathic practitioners and the percentage who are allopathic or any other type of medical practitioners. Web Page Modifications: Heel will modify its main web site and all web pages it owns for each of the Products (the “Individual Product Web Sites”), as follows: (i) A new Homeopathic Dilution Page will be placed on Heel’s web site, that will be readily accessible from the web site’s home page and the home pages of each of the Individual Product Web Sites, and on every other one of Heel’ Individual Product Web Sites now existing or in development; (ii) The Homeopathic Dilution Page shall provide an explanation of the X dilution in a language understandable to the average consumer, in a question and answer format, explaining the level of dilution and method used to dilute the Products, as provided in Exhibit F of the Settlement Agreement; (iii) A link to the FDA web site for its Compliance Policy Guide § 400.400 document shall be provided on all of Heel’s web sites. 6. Who represents the Class? A. Class Representative. For purposes of the Settlement, the Court has appointed Plaintiff Robert A. Mason to serve as the Class Representative. The Class Representative is entitled to seek incentive awards, subject to Court approval. Defendant shall have the option of responding to any such incentive award application, including by contesting the amount of the incentive award requested to the extent it exceeds $3,500. B. Class Counsel. The Court has approved the appointment of The Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron as Class Counsel. You will not be charged for these lawyers. If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, you may hire one at your own expense.

2 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 38 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 51 of 148 From the beginning of the dispute to the present, Class Counsel have not received any payment for their services in prosecuting the case or obtaining the Settlement, nor have they been reimbursed for any out-of-pocket expenses they have incurred. Class Counsel will apply to the Court for an award of attorneys’ fees of up to thirty percent (30%) of the total value of the settlement to the class, plus actual expenses (including their court costs), subject to Court approval. To view the motion for attorney’s fees, costs and incentive award for Plaintiff Robert A. Mason, visit the Settlement Website on or after [DATE]. Defendant shall have the option of responding to any such application, including by contesting any fees and expenses requested to the extent it exceeds thirty percent of the value of the settlement to the Class. If the Court approves the attorneys’ fee and expense application, it will be paid from the Settlement Fund. The Class Members will not have to pay anything toward the fees or expenses of Class Counsel. Class Counsel will seek final approval of the Settlement on behalf of all Class Members. You may hire your own lawyer to represent you in this case if you wish, but it will be at your own expense. 7. How can I exclude myself from the Class? You can get out of the Settlement and the Class by “excluding” yourself (also called “opting-out”). If you exclude yourself, you will not be able to submit a claim form, and you will not be entitled to claim any of the relief offered by the Settlement. If you choose to exclude yourself from the Class, you may pursue whatever legal rights you may have in any separate proceeding if you choose to do so, but you will have to do so at your own expense. To exclude yourself from the Class, you must send a letter saying that you want to be excluded from the class in Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC. “Mass,” or “class” opt-outs shall not be accepted. Your exclusion request must include your name, address, telephone number, signature, and a signed statement to the effect that: “I hereby request to be excluded from the proposed Class in Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC.” Your exclusion request must be postmarked no later than [DATE], and sent via first class mail to the Claims Administrator at the following address: Heel Claims Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063. A request for exclusion that does not include all the above information, that is sent to an address other than the one listed above, or that is not received on time, will not be valid and the person(s) asking to be excluded will be considered a member(s) of the Class, and will be bound as a Class Member(s) by the Settlement. If you elect to opt-out, you will (i) not have any rights as a Class Member pursuant to the Settlement, (ii) not be able to receive any payments as provided in the Settlement, (iii) not be bound by any further orders or judgments in this case, and (iv) remain able to pursue the claims alleged in the case against Defendant by filing your own lawsuit at your own expense. If you proceed on an individual basis, you might receive more, or less, of a benefit than you would otherwise receive under this Settlement or no benefit at all. 8. How can I tell the Court what I think about the Settlement? If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you or your attorney can comment in support of or opposition to the Settlement and have the right to appear before the Court to do so. Your objection to or comment on the Settlement must be submitted in writing to the Claims Administrator at the following address: Heel Claims Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063, by ______, 2013. You must also file your comment or objection with the Court and send a copy of your comment or objection to the attorneys for the Parties at the following addresses, no later than ______, 2013: Clerk of the Court Class Counsel Defendants’ Counsel United States District Court Ronald A. Marron Matthew G. Ball Southern District of California Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron, APLC K&L Gates LLP 333 West Broadway, Suite 420 651 Arroyo Drive 4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 San Diego, CA 92101-8900 San Diego, CA 92103 San Francisco, CA 94111 The objection or comment must be in writing and contain a caption or title that identifies it as “Objection to Class Settlement in Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3056-GPC-KSC,” and also contain: (a) the Class Member’s full name and current address; (b) a signed declaration that he or she is a Class Member; (c) the factual basis and legal grounds for the objection, including any documents sufficient to establish the basis for their standing as a Class Member such as verification under oath as to the approximate date(s) and location(s) of their purchase(s) of the Products; (d) identification of the case name, case number, and court for any prior class action lawsuit in which the objector has objected to a proposed class action settlement, the general nature of such prior objection(s), and the outcome of said prior objection(s); (e) identification of the case name, case number, and court for any prior class action lawsuit in which the objector and the objector’s attorney (if applicable) has objected to a proposed class action settlement, the general nature of such prior objection(s), and the outcome of said prior objection(s); (f) the payment terms of any fee agreement between the objector and the objector’s attorney with respect to the objection; and (g) any attorneys’ fee sharing agreement or referral fee agreement between or among the objector, the objector’s attorney, and/or any third party, including any other attorney or law firm, with respect to the objection. If you wish to appear at the hearing, you will need to file a notice of intention to appear, either in person or through an attorney, with the Court and list the name, address and telephone number of the attorney, if any, who will appear. This notice of intention to appear will need to be filed no later than ______, 2013. If you do not submit a written comment on the proposed Settlement or the applications of the Class Representative and Class Counsel for an incentive award and attorneys’ fees and expenses, respectively, in accordance with the deadline and procedure set forth above, and you are not granted relief by the Court, you will waive your right to be heard at the fairness hearing. If you do not object as described above, and you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you will be deemed to have consented to the Court’s certification of, and jurisdiction over, the Class, and to have released the Released Claims (defined in the Settlement Agreement).

3 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 39 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 52 of 148 9. What is the effect of final settlement approval? If the Court grants final approval of the Settlement, the Court will enter a final order and judgment, and dismiss the case. The release by Class Members will then take effect. All Class Members will release, with the exception of claims for personal injury, any and all claims, demands, rights, suits, liabilities, and causes of action of every nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, matured or unmatured, at law or in equity, existing under federal and/or state law, contingent or non-contingent, suspected or unsuspected, against Defendant and the Released Persons (as defined in Section 1.29 of the Settlement Agreement) and which arise out of, in connection with, or related in any way, directly or indirectly to Defendant’s advertising, marketing, packaging, labeling, promotion, manufacture, sale or distribution of the Products, that have been brought, could have been brought, or are currently pending, by any Class Member against the Released Persons in any forum in the United States (including their territories and Puerto Rico), up to the Effective Date. Class Members and Plaintiff will also release any claims that are alleged or could have been alleged in the Action. Please refer to Section 6 of the Settlement Agreement for a full description of the claims and persons that will be released upon final approval of the Settlement. Further, by the Settlement, Class Members expressly waive and relinquish any rights or benefits available to them under Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides: A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.

There is a certain amount of time to appeal the final order and judgment. Once that time has expired with no appeal having been filed, or when any appeal that has been filed is conclusively resolved, claim forms and payments under the Settlement will then be processed, and claims payments will then be distributed. Whether you consider the Settlement favorable or unfavorable, any and all Class Members who do not exclude themselves from the Class will not be permitted to continue to assert Released Claims in any other litigation or proceeding against Defendant or other persons and entities covered by the release. You can obtain a copy of the Settlement Agreement from the Clerk of the Court, online at [URL], or by writing to the Claims Administrator at Heel Claims Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063. If you do not wish to be a Class Member, you must exclude yourself from the Class (see Question No. 7 above). If the Settlement is not approved, the case will proceed as if no settlement had been attempted or reached. There can be no assurance that if the Settlement is not approved and the case resumes, the Class will recover more than is provided for under the Settlement, or will recover anything at all. 10. When and where will the Court hold a hearing on the fairness of the Settlement? A fairness hearing has been set for ______2013 at ______.m., before Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel in Courtroom 2D, Second Floor, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, 221 West Broadway, San Diego, California, 92101. At the hearing, the Court will hear any properly submitted comments, objections, and arguments concerning the fairness of the proposed settlement, including the amount requested by Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses and incentive awards for the Class Representatives. If you have filed an objection to the Settlement, you or your own lawyer need to attend this hearing to have the objection considered by the Court. Note: The date and time of the fairness hearing are subject to change by Court Order. Check the Settlement Website as the date nears, to verify the final approval hearing date has not changed. 11. Do I have to come to the fairness hearing? May I speak at the hearing? You do not need to attend the fairness hearing to remain a Class Member or submit a claim for a cash payment. You or your own lawyer may attend the hearing if you wish, at your own expense. If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you may ask the Court for permission to speak at the hearing concerning the proposed Settlement or the application of Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses and incentive awards for the Class Representatives by following the instructions in Question No. 8 above. 12. How do I receive my share of the Settlement? If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, and would like to receive money, you must submit a timely and valid claim form as set forth in the answer to Question No. 5 above. Claim forms must be submitted online or postmarked by the Claim Filing Deadline, which will be ninety (90) days after the date the Court enters the judgment. You can file a claim online or download a copy of the claim form at [URL] or obtain a copy of the claim form by writing to the Claims Administrator at Heel Claims Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, Irving, TX, 75063or calling toll-free (___) ______. 13. What happens if I do nothing at all? If you do nothing, you will receive no payment from the Settlement. You will still be part of the Class, however, and subject to the release described in Section 6 of the Settlement Agreement and Question No. 9 above. This means you will not be permitted to continue to assert released claims in any other case against Defendants or other persons or entities covered by the release. Please refer to Section 6 of the Settlement Agreement for a full description of the claims and persons who will be released upon final approval of the Settlement. 14. Where do I get additional information? This notice provides only a summary of the matters relating to the Settlement. For more detailed information, you may wish to review the Settlement Agreement. You can view the Settlement Agreement and get more information at[URL]. You can also get more information by calling toll-free (___) ______. The Settlement Agreement and all other pleadings and papers filed in the case are available for

4 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 40 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 53 of 148 inspection and copying during regular business hours at the office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, 333 West Broadway, Suite 420, San Diego, CA 92101-8900. If you would like additional information, you can also write to Class Counsel at the address listed in Question No. 8 above. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT, THE JUDGE, OR THE DEFENDANT WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SETTLEMENT

5 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 41 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 54 of 148

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 42 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 55 of 148 LEGAL NOTICE A federal court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. If you purchased a product manufactured by Heel, Inc. labeled as “homeopathic,” such as Traumeel or Zeel, your rights may be affected by a proposed class action settlement Para una notificación en Español, llamar o visitar [www.______]

WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT? WHAT ARE YOUR OPTIONS? A proposed settlement has been reached in a class SUBMIT THE The only way to get a cash refund. action lawsuit. The lawsuit claims that labeling and CLAIM FORM To get a refund, class members marketing on homeopathic products manufactured or must file a claim form online or distributed by defendants Heel, Inc. was false or send a completed claim form to deceptive. Heel stands by its advertising and denies the Claims Administrator at the it did anything wrong. The Court has not decided address below postmarked no which side was right. Instead, the parties have later than [DATE]. decided to settle the case. EXCLUDE Get out of the lawsuit and the YOURSELF settlement. Get no cash refund. If ARE YOU A CLASS MEMBER? you do not want to be bound by You are a class member and may be eligible to the settlement, you must send a receive a settlement benefit if you purchased any letter to the Claims Administrator homeopathic product manufactured or distributed by at the address below requesting to Heel labeled as “homeopathic” between December be excluded. The letter must be . If you 21, 2008 and [DATE] (the “Products”). You should postmarked by [DATE] read the entire Notice carefully because your legal exclude yourself, you cannot rights are affected whether you act or not. receive a benefit from this settlement, but you can sue the WHAT DOES THIS SETTLEMENT PROVIDE? manufacturer of the Products for the claims alleged in this lawsuit. A settlement fund of $1 million is being set up to pay OBJECT OR Write the Court about why you do, claims to eligible class members, attorneys’ fees and COMMENT or do not, like the settlement. If costs, incentive award to the named plaintiff, and the you want to object to the notice and claims administration costs. Heel is also settlement you must file a written agreeing to make certain changes to the manner in statement with the Court by which it labels and advertises the Products. The [DATE]. complete Settlement Agreement is found at DO NOTHING You will get no cash refund and www.XXXXXX.com. you give up your rights. If you do not exclude yourself from the WHAT HAPPENS NOW? settlement, you will be bound by The Court will hold a hearing in this case on [DATE] the Court’s decisions. at [TIME] at the federal courthouse located at 221 West Broadway, Courtroom 2D, San Diego, CA Your rights and options – and the deadlines to 92101, to consider final approval of the settlement, exercise them – are only summarized in this notice. payment of attorneys’ fees of up to thirty percent of The Detailed Notice describes, in full, how to file a the Settlement value and costs, incentive award of up claim, object, or exclude yourself and provides other to $3,500 for the Class Representative in the lawsuit, important information. For more information and to and related issues. The motion(s) by Class Counsel obtain a Detailed Notice, claim form or other for attorneys’ fees and costs and incentive award for documents, visit www.XXXX.com, call toll-free [1- the Class Representative will be available for viewing 800-XXX-XXXX], or write to: Heel Claims on the settlement website after they are filed and Administrator, c/o SEOmap, 7440 Primrose Drive, before the Class Members must decide whether to Irving, TX, 75063. opt out or object. You may appear at the hearing in person or through your attorney at your own cost, but you are not required to do so.

1-800-XXX-XXXX www.XXXXXX.COM DO NOT CALL HEEL, INC. OR THE COURT

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 43 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 56 of 148

EXHIBIT D

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 44 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 57 of 148

1901000 - TRAUMEEL OINTMENT 100 G 1904055 - TRAUMEEL OINTMENT 50G RETAIL 1304585 - TRAUMEEL TABLETS 100CT RETAIL 1904060 - TRAUMEEL GEL 50G RETAIL W/5TH 2201010 - SINUSIN NASAL SPRAY 20ML 2801000 - DETOX KIT OD 3 x 50 ML 1601350 - TRAUMEEL OD 50ML 1304770 - ZEEL TABLET 100CT RETAIL 1904095 - ZEEL OINTMENT 50G RETAIL W/5TH 1001010 - ALLERGY TABLET 100 CT 1001600 - SINUS TABLET 100 CT 1302340 - VERTIGOHEEL RX TABLET 100 CT 1001100 - CALMING TABLET 100 CT 1304395 - NEUREXAN TABLET 60CT RETAIL 2201400 - LUFFEEL NS 20 ML 1001545 - TRAUMEEL EAR DROPS MONODOSE 10 1901800 - TRAUMEEL GEL 250G 2100010 - TRAUMEEL COMBO PACK 1001680 - VIBURCOL MONODOSE 10CT 1701000 - NECTADYN COUGH SYRUP 1302330 - TRAUMEEL TABLET 100 CT 1304065 - CERECOMP TABLET 100CT RETAIL 1302090 - COCCULUS COMP. TABLET 100 CT 1001080 - BRONCHITIS TABLET 100 CT 1001020 - ARTHRITIS TABLET 100 CT 1001271 - FLU-PLUS TABLET 100 CT 1001030 - DISCONTINUED-ASTHMA TABLET 100 1001040 - BACK TABLET 100 CT 1601201 - LYMPHOMYOSOT 50 ML OD 1001320 - HEADACHE II TABLET 100 CT 1001257 - OCULOHEEL MONODOSE 10CT 1903025 - BHI HEMORRHOID RELIEF OINTMENT 1302130 - ENGYSTOL TABLET 100 CT 1001372 - INFLAMMATION TABLET 100CT 1001350 - HEMORRHOID TABLET 100 CT 41015400 - TRAUMEEL RX INJECTABLE 2.2 ML 1304120 - ENGYSTOL TABLET 60 CT RETAIL 1004001 - ADRISIN TABLET 60CT RETAIL 1901500 - TRAUMEEL OINTMENT 50 G 1302211 - NERVOHEEL TABLET 100CT 1001170 - COUGH TABLET 100 CT 1302186 - LYMPHOMYOSOT TABLET 100 CT 1001666 - DISCONTINUED-URI-CONTROL TABLE 1001500 - NAUSEA TABLET 100 CT 1001180 - DIARRHEA TABLET 100 CT 1601122 - GALIUM HEEL OD 50 ML 1601295 - SINUSIN ORAL DROPS

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 45 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 58 of 148

1001640 - STOMACH TABLET 100 CT 2202500 - VINCEEL THROAT SPRAY 20 ML 1001310 - HEADACHE TABLET 100 CT 1001150 - COLD TABLET 100 CT 1302170 - KLIMAKTHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302280 - SPASCUPREEL TABLET 100 CT 1001630 - SPASM-PAIN TABLET 100 CT 1001160 - CONSTIPATION TABLET 100 CT 1001610 - SKIN TABLET 100 CT 1302216 - NEUREXAN TABLET 100 CT 1302360 - ZEEL TABLET 100 CT 1901555 - TRAUMEEL GEL 50 G 1001195 - ECZEMA TABLET 100 CT 1001240 - EXHAUSTION TABLET 100 CT 1001660 - THROAT TABLET 100 CT 1001665 - DISCONTINUED-URI-CLEANSE TABLE 1903000 - ARNICA OINTMENT 50GR 1001300 - HAIR AND SKIN TABLET 100 CT 1302205 - MUCOSA COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 C 1302095 - COENZYME COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 1302140 - GASTRICUMEEL TABLET 100 CT 1602230 - NUX VOMICA HA OD 50ML 1302025 - ARNICA PC TABLET 100 CT 1302230 - OSTEOHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302150 - GRIPP-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1601360 - VALERIANAHEEL OD 50ML 1001065 - BODY PURE TABLET 100 CT 1903020 - BHI VARICOSE RELIEF OINTMENT 5 1302338 - UBICHINON COMPOSITUM TABLET 10 1001410 - LIGHTHEADED TABLET 100 CT 1001360 - INFECTION TABLET 100 CT 5007901 - TRAUMEEL OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 2601100 - DISPLAY TRAUMEEL 50 G 12 PK 1001670 - VARICOSE TABLET 100 CT 1903010 - CALENDULA OINTMENT 50GR 1001510 - NEURALGIA TABLET 100 CT 1001285 - GASTRO-CLEANSE TABLET 100 CT 1001070 - BONE TABLET 100 CT 5002105 - CEREBRUM COMPOSITUM OV 2.2 ML 1302155 - HEPAR COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 CT 1601020 - ARNICA-HEEL OD 50ML 1001223 - ENZYME TABLET 100CT 1302217 - NEURO-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1902000 - ZEEL OINTMENT 50G 5002701 - COENZYME COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1001491 - PMS MULIMEN 100CT TABS 5005401 - LYMPHOMYOSOT OV 1.1 ML 10 CT

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 46 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 59 of 148

1601150 - HORMEEL OD 50ML 1302160 - HEPEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302084 - CERECOMP TABLET 100CT 1001000 - ALERTNESS TABLET 100 CT 1302165 - HISTAMIN TABLET 100 CT 1602190 - IGNATIA HA OD 50ML 5008001 - UBICHINON COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 2502000 - VIBURCOL SUPP. 12 CT 1602180 - HAMAMELIS HA OD 50ML 1001380 - INJURY TABLET 100 CT 1302277 - SOLIDAGO COMPOSITUM TABLET 10 1601000 - AESCULUS COMP OD 50ML 5004702 - HEPAR COMPOSITUM OV 2.2 ML 10 1302328 - THUJA FORTE TABLET 100 CT 1302326 - TONICO HEEL TABLET 100 CT 5006601 - PLACENTA COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1602040 - BERBERIS HA OD 50ML 1602150 - GELSEMIUM HA OD 50ML 1302107 - DISCUS COMPOSITUM RX TABLET 10 1001390 - INTESTINE TABLET 100 CT 1001110 - CHAMOMILLA COMPLEX TABLET 100 1302220 - OCULOHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302255 - PLACENTA COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 1001120 - CHELIDONIUM TABLET 100 CT 1601080 - COCCULUS COMP OD 50ML 1601320 - SYZYGIUM COMP RX OD 50ML 1302327 - TONSILLA COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 1302323 - TESTIS COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 C 2601104 - DISPLAY ADRISIN BLISTER POCKET 5008502 - ZEEL OV 2.0 ML 10 CT 1602110 - COLOCYNTHIS HA OD 50ML 5007002 - SOLIDAGO COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1001260 - FEMININE TABLET 100 CT 1302345 - VISCUM COMPOSITUM FORTE TABLET 1601380 - VOMITUSHEEL OD 50ML 1302125 - ECHINACEA COMPOSITUM FORTE RX 1602170 - GRAPHITES HA OD 50ML 2601101 - TRAUMEEL GEL 50 G 12 PK 1602030 - BELLADONNA HA OD 50ML 1001560 - RENDIMAX TABLET 100 CT 1302320 - SULPHUR HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1001210 - ECHINACEA PC TABLET 100 CT 1001060 - BLEEDING TABLET 100 CT 1302260 - RENEEL RX TABLET 100 CT 1601100 - CRALONIN RX OD 50ML 1302235 - OVARIUM COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 2601108 - DISPLAY TRAUMEEL OINTMENT 100

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 47 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 60 of 148

5005901 - MUCOSA COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1302102 - CUTIS COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 CT 1601340 - TARTEPHEDREEL OD 50ML 1602140 - FERRUM HA OD 50ML 1601070 - CAUSTICUM COMP OD 50ML 5003701 - ENGYSTOL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5004101 - GALIUM HEEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1001250 - DISCONTINUED-EYE TABLET 100 CT 1602269 - SABAL HOMACCORD OD 50ML 1302215 - NEURALGO RHEUM TABLET 100 CT 1302322 - TARTEPHEDREEL TABLET 100 CT 1302190 - MERCURIUS HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1901810 - LYMPHOMYOSOT GEL 250 G 1601330 - TANACET-HEEL OD 50ML 1601221 - NASO-HEEL OD 50ML 1302257 - PULSATILLA COMPOSITUM TABLET 1 1602061 - CHELIDONIUM HA OD 50ML 1302350 - YPSILOHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302325 - THYREOIDEA COMPOSITUM RX TABLE 1601290 - SCHWEF-HEEL OD 50ML 1602290 - VERATRUM HA OD 50ML 41013851 - ZEEL RX INJ 2.0 ML 10 CT AMP 5006401 - OVARIUM COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1602020 - APIS HA OD 50ML 1602280 - SELENIUM HA OD 50ML 1602120 - DROSERA HA OD 50ML 1302060 - BRONCHALIS-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1601370 - VERTIGOHEEL RX OD 50ML 1601260 - PSORINOHEEL RX OD 50ML 1302145 - GLYOXAL COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 1302120 - DUODENOHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1301000 - DIARRHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1001530 - DISCONTINUED-PERSPIRATION TABL 1601130 - GINSENG COMP OD 50ML 5008201 - VISCUM COMP FORTE OV 2.2 ML 10 1601141 - GYNACOHEEL 50ML OD 5003205 - DISCUS COMP OV RX 2.2 ML 10 CT 1302180 - LITHIUMEEL TABLET 100 CT 1601160 - HUSTEEL OD 50ML 1602260 - RANUNCULUS HA OD 50ML 1602240 - PHOSPHOR HA OD 50ML 1302300 - SPIGELON TABLET 100 CT 1601190 - LEPTANDRA COMP OD 50ML 41012701 - SPASCUPREEL RX INJ 1.1ML 10CT 1601010 - AESCULUS-HEEL OD 50ML 1602080 - CIMICIFUGA HA OD 50ML 1601030 - AURUMHEEL RX OD 50ML

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 48 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 61 of 148

1302040 - BARIJODEEL TABLET 100 CT 1001667 - BHI URI CONTROL RX TABLET 100C 1001031 - BHI ASTHMA RX TABLET 100CT 5004301 - GLYOXAL COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 5003605 - ECHINACEA COMPOSITUM FORTE RX 5006201 - NEURO HEEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5003102 - CUTIS COMPOSITUM OV 2.2 ML 10 1601180 - LAMIOFLUR OD 50ML 41012852 - LYMPHOMYOSOT RX INJ. 1.1 ML 10 5006801 - PULSATILLA COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 1602201 - MELILOTUS HA RX OD 50ML 1601051 - CANTHARIS COMPOSITUM OD 50ML 1602070 - CHINA HA OD 50ML 1302259 - RAUWOLFIA COMPOSITUM RX TABLET 1302200 - MOLYBDAN COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 1601270 - RHODODENDRONEEL OD 50ML 1001290 - DISCONTINUED-GINKGO COMPLEX TA 5007301 - TESTIS COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1602210 - MEZEREUM HA OD 50ML 1601300 - SPIGELON OD 50ML 1302270 - RHEUMA-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 5006301 - NUX VOMICA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5003510 - ECHINACEA COMPOSITUM RX OV 2.2 1302000 - ABROPERNOL TABLET 100 CT 1601170 - KALMIA COMP OD 50ML 1001585 - DISCONTINUED-SAW PALMETTO COMP 5007701 - TONICO HEEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1001130 - DISCONTINUED-CHEST TABLET 100 5007802 - DISCONTINUED-TONSILLA COMP P O 1001664 - BHI URI CLEANSE RX TABLET 100C 1302110 - DROPERTEEL TABLET 100 CT 1602000 - ACONITUM HA OD 50ML 5007801 - TONSILLA COMPOSITUM OV 2.2 ML 5007101 - SPASCUPREEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1302080 - CALCOHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302311 - STRUMEEL RX TABLET 100 CT 1601230 - PODOPHYLLUM COMP OD 50ML 5005501 - MELILOTUS HA RX OV 1.1 ML 10 C 1302321 - THALAMUS COMP RX TABLET 100CT 41012070 - MUCOSA COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 M 5004501 - GRIPP HEEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1302070 - BRYACONEEL TABLET 100 CT 1001450 - DISCONTINUED-MASCULINE TABLET 5006851 - RAUWOLFIA COMP RX OV 2.2 ML 10 1601311 - STRUMEEL FORTE RX OD 50ML 5008301 - VISCUM COMP MEDIUM OV 2.2 ML 1 1601209 - MOMORDICA COMPOSITUM RX OD 50

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 49 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 62 of 148

1001470 - DISCONTINUED-MENSTRUAL TABLET 1302275 - DISCONTINUED-RHUS TOX PC TABLE 1302089 - CIRCULO HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302240 - PAEONIA-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 5002203 - CHELIDONIUM-HOMACCORD OV 1.1ML 5004801 - HEPEEL OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5006901 - SELENIUM HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1302050 - BELLADONNA COMP. TABLET 100 CT 1001555 - DISCONTINUED-RECUPERATION TABL 5008050 - VERATRUM HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1601280 - SECALE COMP OD 50ML 5001700 - CANTHARIS COMPOSITUM OV 2.2 ML 5005101 - IGNATIA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5002902 - COR COMP RX OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 1302010 - ALETRIS-HEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302020 - APIS COMPOSITUM TABLET 100 CT 5001401 - BELLADONNA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5005802 - MOMORDICA RX OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 5003902 - EUPHORBIUM COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 C 1302030 - ARSURANEEL TABLET 100 CT 1302100 - CRUROHEEL TABLET 100 CT 1602010 - ANACARDIUM HA OD 50ML 1302037 - ATROPINUM COMPOSITUM RX TABLET 5004601 - HAMAMELIS HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5007601 - THYREOIDEA COMPOSITUM RX OV 2. 5001201 - APIS HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1601040 - CACTUS COMP RX OD 50ML 5007391 - THALAMUS COMP RX OV 2.2 ML 10C 1602220 - NATRIUM HA OD 50ML 1601090 - COLNADUL OD 50ML 5004901 - HISTAMIN OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5006754 - PSORINOHEEL RX OV 1.1 ML 10CT 5006101 - DISCONTINUED-NEURALGO RHEUM O 5004401 - GRAPHITES HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5001602 - CACTUS COMP RX OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 5001501 - BERBERIS HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1602160 - GLONOIN HA RX OD 50ML 1902010 - ZEEL OINTMENT RX ONLY 5001901 - CAUSTICUM COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 CT 5006890 - SABAL HOMACCORD RX OV 1.1ML 10 5002501 - DISCONTINUED-CIRCULO INJEEL OV 1302135 - ERIGOTHEEL TABLET 100 CT 41011997 - DISCUS COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 M 41012110 - PLACENTA COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 5002301 - CHINA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 41012003 - ENGYSTOL RX INJ 1.1 ML 10 CT A 5005002 - HORMEEL RX OV 1.1 ML 10 CT

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 50 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 63 of 148

5007201 - SPIGELON OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 41012050 - HEPAR COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 ML 41012020 - GALIUM-HEEL RX INJ 1.1 ML 10CT 41012080 - NEURALGO RHEUM RX INJ 1.1 ML 1 41011993 - COENZYME COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 41011990 - CERECOMP RX INJ 2.2 ML 10 CT A 5002502 - CIRCULOHEEL OV 1.1 ML 10CT 41012210 - UBICHINON COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2. 5004001 - FERRUM HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5003001 - CRALONIN RX OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5002440 - CIMICIFUGA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5002801 - COLOCYNTHIS HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 1001547 - DISCONTINUED-TRAUMEEL EAR DROP 5003301 - DROSERA HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 5004201 - GELSEMIUM HA OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 3101130 - DISCONTINUED-BOOK PRINCIPLES O 5009000 - DISCONTINUED-ALLERGY OV 2.2 ML 3101145 - BOOK PRACTITIONERS HANDBOOK OF 41012030 - GLYOXAL COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 41011995 - CUTIS COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2.2 ML 1602130 - DULCAMARA HA OD 50ML 5006102 - NEURALGO RHEUM RX OV 1.1 ML 10 5008101 - VERTIGOHEEL RX OV 1.1 ML 10 CT 3101095 - DISCONTINUED-BOOK MATERIA MEDI 1001654 - TRAUMED ORAL DROPS 5007501 - DISCONTINUED-THUJA FORTE OV 1. 3101120 - DISCONTINUED-BOOK MEDICINA ANT 3101042 - DISCONTINUED-BOOK FUNDAMENTALS 6004020 - PIPETTE ORAL VIAL 3107509 - DISCONTINUED-JOURNAL BT SPANIS 3160015 - ORDER FORM-HFS 3106365 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT TR 5705013 - SAMPLE SACHET TRAUMEEL OINT HF 5006701 - PODOPHYLLUM COMP OV 2.2 ML 10 3108231 - DISCONTINUED-TRAUMEEL FLOOR DI 3110050 - CATALOG RETAILER HEEL PRODUCTS 3110005 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE CPG RETA 5701026 - NEUREXAN SAMPLE TABLET 15CT 3140104 - BUSINESS CARD DANIELA 3106018 - LITERATURE CARD CONSUMER/PATIE 3140117 - BUSINESS CARDS-CHANEL DESJARDI 5701005 - TRAUMEEL BLISTER SAMPLE TAB 15 3106042 - LITERATURE TRAUMEEL COMBO PACK 3160012 - ORDER FORM RETAIL PHARMACY 5701004 - ADRISIN BLISTER SAMPLE TAB 15 5701025 - CERECOMP TABLET 15 CT SAMPLE 3106019 - SELL SHEET ADRISIN RETAIL

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 51 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 64 of 148

3108501 - TRAUMEEL COMBO PACK BUTTONS RE 5701060 - SPASCUPREEL SAMPLE TABLET 15 C 5701030 - MUCOSA COMP SAMPLE TABLET 15 C 5702350 - SINUS SAMPLE TABLET 15 CT 5701021 - LYMPHOMYOSOT SAMPLE TABS 15CT 3140101 - BUSINESS CARD MORGAN ROUNTREE 3106317 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT EN 5702361 - ZEEL SAMPLE TABLET 100CT 5705004 - SAMPLE SACHET TRAUMEEL OINT P 3108056 - SELLSHEET SINUSIN RETAIL 5701022 - GRIPP HEEL SAMPLE TABLET 15CT 3108050 - SELLSHEET ENGYSTOL RETAIL 5701024 - ENGYSTOL RETAIL SAMPLE TABLET 3110033 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT VI 6004011 - AMPULE CRACKERS 10CT 3108054 - SELLSHEET NEUREXAN RETAIL 3108049 - SELLSHEET ZEEL RETAIL 3106080 - BROCHURE-SPASCUPREEL DOCTOR 5701040 - COENZYME COMP SAMPLE TABLET 15 3106055 - BROCHURE PATIENT DETOX BOOKLET 3106036 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE QUARTERL 3108015 - FORM-HEEL/BHI CREDIT APP 3106072 - SELL SHEET LUFFEEL 3106058 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE DETOX KI 3108057 - SELLSHEET TRAUMEEL RETAIL 3106345 - BROCHURE CONSUMER/PATIENT NEUR 3108004 - SHELF FLAG HOLDER 3/4" W CLEAR 5701050 - ENGYSTOL SAMPLE TABLET 15 CT 3160010 - ORDER FORM-PRACTITIONER 5702370 - ALLERGY SAMPLE TABLET 15 CT 5702310 - FLU PLUS SAMPLE TABLET 15 CT 3106307 - BROCHURE CERECOMP PATIENT RETA 3106083 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT SI 5702330 - DISCONTINUED-TRAUMEEL SAMPLE T 5701003 - NEUREXAN BLISTER SAMPLE TAB 30 3107508 - DISCONTINUED-JOURNAL-MEDICINA 3108053 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT LU 3103218 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE WINTER W 5701002 - DISPLAY NEUREXAN BLISTER SAMPL 3110020 - LYMPHOMYOSOT DOCTOR BROCHURE 3106093 - BROCHURE PATIENT TRAUMEEL SING 3108008 - SHELF DIVIDER 1"H X 10" L STMI 3106132 - BROCHURE PATIENT ZEEL SINGLE 3108009 - RETAIL SHELF TALKERS TRAUMEEL 5702305 - DISCUS COMPOSITUM RX TABLET SA 3108029 - POSTER TRAUMEEL P&P 5702320 - BRONCHITIS SAMPLE TABLET 15 CT

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 52 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 65 of 148

3106029 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT OC 3108134 - DISCONTINUED-PROTOCOL-PAIN MAN 3140111 - BUSINESS CARD CINDY VAN LIEROP 3110040 - BROCHURE-ZEEL DOCTOR 3201112 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY ZEEL RHEUMA 3108059 - SELLSHEET VINCEEL RETAIL 3201134 - STUDY TRAUMEEL OINT DOUBLE BLI 3106127 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE- WOMEN'S 3201138 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY ENS DOUBLE 3140103 - BUSINESS CARDS CLIFF VAN BLARI 3201152 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY ENGYSTOL CO 57012900 - SPASCUPREEL RX INJ SAMPLE 1.1 3201163 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY AMA OTOLARY 3108108 - PRODUCT PROFILE DETOX AND DRAI 3201175 - DISCONTINUED-REPRINT PODIATRY 3108140 - DISCONTINUED-SUMMER CARE INDIC 3106508 - DISCONTINUED-CURRENT KERSSCHOT 3110030 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE-TRAUMEEL 3106700 - CATALOG RX CLUB PROTOCOLS 2 3130023 - BAGS RETAIL TRAUMEEL 3106701 - CATALOG RX CLUB PROTOCOLS 1 3140105 - BUSINESS CARDS-LAURI PARENT 3106702 - CATALOG HEEL FEATURED PROF PRO 3106364 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE DPM TRAU 3106703 - CATALOG RX CLUB PROTOCOLS 3 3201047 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY MULT PRODUC 3107278 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2007 I 3108067 - SELL SHEET TRAUMEEL COMBO PACK 3107279 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2008 D 3108129 - DISCONTINUED-SLEEP & STRESS RE 3107280 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2008 V 3108136 - DISCONTINUED-PROTOCOL COLD COU 3107281 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2008 V 3108500 - DISCONTINUED-DETOX WATER BOTTL 3107282 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2008 V 3110014 - BROCHURE DOCTOR SINUSIN 3107285 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL VOL. 4 3110037 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE-HEEL VER 3107286 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL 2010 E 3130020 - BAGS-HEEL TRAUMEEL 3107287 - DISCONTINUED-BT JOURNAL VOL 5 3106063 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE HEEL ESS 3107500 - DISCONTINUED-JOURNAL MEDICINA 3201031 - STUDY DPM POST SURGERY 3107506 - DISCONTINUED-JOURNAL MEDICINA 3140109 - BUSINESS CARD ANNA BLOCK 3107507 - DISCONTINUED-JOURNAL MEDICINA

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 53 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 66 of 148

3140114 - BUSINESS CARD SANDRA BERNSTEIN 3140140 - DISCONTINUED-BUSINESS CARD TRA 57012080 - NEURALGO RHEUM RX INJ SAMPLE 3 3106075 - BROCHURE CONSUMER COLD/FLU 57015402 - TRAUMEEL RX SAMPLE INJECTABLE 3108001 - DISPLAY STAND PRACTITIONERS 3108058 - SELLSHEET VIBRUCOL RETAIL 3108002 - CARTON GABLE KIT 3108060 - DISCONTINUE HEEL DIARY 2011 3106077 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE RETAILER 3108100 - DISCONTINUED-PDR PAGE-HEEL TRA 3108005 - RETAIL SHELF TALKERS ADRISIN 3108119 - DISCONTINUED-PROTOCOL ALLERGY 3108006 - RETAIL SHELF TALKERS ENGYSTOL 3108133 - DISCONTINUED-PROTOCOL WOMENS C 3108007 - RETAIL SHELF TALKERS NEUREXAN 3108135 - DISCONTINUED-PRODUCT PROFILE N 3106059 - BROCHURE- GRIPP HEEL/ENGYSTOL 3108137 - DISCONTINUED-PROTOCOL DPM TRAU 3106388 - LITERATURE CONSUMER/PATIENT ZE 3201010 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY VIBURCOL AG 3108013 - SHELF TALKER ALLERGY $9.95 3106095 - DISCONTINUED BROCHURE - VIRAL 3106079 - BROCHURE NEUREXAN PATIENT P&P 3110010 - DISCONTINUED-ALLERGIES BROCHUR 3108017 - Poster-Zeel P&P 3201011 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY SPASCUPREEL 3108019 - DISCONTINUED-Poster-Zeel HFS 3201030 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY-VIBURCOL TR 3108023 - COUPON HEALTH FOOD STORE SINUS 3110039 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE DETOXIFI 3108026 - DISCONTINUED-SHELF TALKER ZEEL 3140128 - BUSINESS CARD-JAMIN BUSICK 3108027 - POSTER DETOX P&P 3130022 - BAGS-HEEL PAPER 3201006 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY TRAUMEEL TH 3140005 - BINDER RX CLUB EMPTY 3108030 - POSTER DET 3140102 - BUSINESS CARDS EMILY HORN 3108031 - POSTER ALLERGY PRACTITIONER 3106068 - BROCHURE CONSUMER/PATIENT PAI 3108032 - POSTER COLD FLU PRACTITIONER 3140147 - DISCONTINUED-PENS-HEEL TRAUMEE 3108036 - DISCONTINUED-INFOPAKS PODIATRI 3140108 - BUSINESS CARDS KEVIN MONTOYA 3106060 - BROCHURE DISCUS RX DOCTOR 3140110 - BUSINESS CARDS JESUS PAEZ

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 54 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 67 of 148

3106081 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE DC TRAUM 3140113 - BUSINESS CARD MARTIN KATZ 3108051 - SELLSHEET CERECOMP RETAIL 3140116 - DISCONTINUED-BUSINESS CARD NAN 3108052 - SELLSHEET DETOX KIT RETAIL 57012004 - ENGYSTOL RX INJ SAMPLE 1.1 ML 3140129 - DISCONTINUED-BUSINESS CARD TAN 57012853 - LYMPHOMYOSOT RX INJ SAMPLE 1.1 3160006 - DISCONTINUED-ORDER FORM DPM 57013851 - ZEEL RX SAMPLE INJ 2.0 ML 1 CT 3140118 - BUSINESS CARDS ANGELO VALDEZ 5701550 - SAMPLE SACHET TRAUMEEL OINT EV 6002081 - CARTON DISPENSER TRAUMEEL OINT 3201053 - DISCONTINUED-STUDY VERTIGOHEEL 3106092 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE VINCEEL 3140119 - BUSINESS CARDS MAGGIE DEVLYN 5702340 - VERTIGOHEEL RX SAMPLE TABLET 1 3140130 - BUSINESS CARD FREDDY ROBLETO 3106056 - BROCHURE DOCTOR DETOX KIT 3140124 - BUSINESS CARDS THOMAS PELLEGRI 3140123 - DISCONTINUED-BUSINESS CARD MAR 3140125 - BUSINESS CARD COREY STONE 6002080 - DISCONTINUED-RETAIL POP DISPLA 3140126 - BUSINESS CARD CELESTE LINTON 3140131 - BUSINESS CARDS JOAN SULLIVAN 3140127 - BUSINESS CARD AIMEE OLIVAS 3108055 - SELLSHEET OCULOHEEL RETAIL 3106091 - BROCHURE VINCEEL DOCTOR 3106022 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 1001544 - TRAUMEEL EAR DROPS MONODOSE RX 3103219 - BROCHURE ENGYSTOL DOCTOR 3106000 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE CURRENT 3106016 - TRAUMEEL INJECTION BROCHURE 3106002 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106020 - BROCHURE NEUREXAN DOCTOR 3106003 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE DET MANU 3106024 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106004 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE PATIENT 3106031 - BROCHURE DOCTOR INJECTIONS 3106005 - BROCHURE NUX VOMICA DOCTOR 3101127 - DISCONTINUED-BOOK PDR FOOTCARE 3106006 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE GI PATIE 3106017 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106007 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TECHNICA 2601109 - DISPENSER OINTMENT SACHETS 50C 3106008 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE RX FLYER 3106021 - BROCHURE AID TRAUMEEL DOSAGE F

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 55 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 68 of 148

3106009 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE CHILDREN 3106023 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE AID TRAU 3106010 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE AID TRAU 3106028 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106011 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE IMMUNE G 3106030 - DISCONTINUED-TRAUMEEL POP SELL 3106035 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE PATIENT 3106033 - BROCHURE TRAUMEEL AND ZEEL INJ 1601200 - DISCONTINUED - LYMPHOMYOSOT OD 3106038 - BROCHURE DETOX QUESTINONAIRE S 3106037 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE INJ. PRA 3106041 - BROCHURE ZEEL MOA 3106039 - BROCHURE DETOX QUESTIONNAIRE 3106045 - BROCHURE PRACTITIONER TRAUMEEL 3101010 - DISCONTINUED-BIOPUNCTURE SPRTS 3106013 - BROCHURE AID TRAUMEEL MOA 3106052 - BROCHURE CERECOMP PATIENT 3106014 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106015 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3106012 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE TRAUMEEL 3140148 - PENS-HEEL 3160005 - DISCONTINUED-ORDER FORM PHARMA 5701020 - ADRISIN SAMPLE TABLET 15CT 3108061 - DISCONTINUED-SELL SHEET TRAUME 3108090 - NOTEPAD-HEEL 3106027 - DISCONTINUED-BROCHURE NEUREXAN 1903021 - DISCONTINUED-BHI VARICOSE RELI 3140115 - BUSINESS CARD-JENNY SCHLICHTE 3140107 - BUSINESS CARDS KATHLEEN NOBILE 3108048 - SELLSHEET NECTADYN RETAIL 1004005 - ADRISIN BONUS PACK 100CT 1304390 - NEUREXAN BONUS PACK 100CT 1601353 - TRAUMEEL ORAL DROPS 50ML RED 1901510 - TRAUMEEL X OINTMENT4 PANEL PRA 2601105 - DISPENSER OINTMENT SACHETS 50C 41012130 - PULSATILLA COMPOSITUM RX INJ 2

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 56 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 69 of 148

EXHIBIT E

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 57

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 70 of 148

(of 14 actives, see Drug Facts*) Drug see actives, 14 (of

*Contains 12 natural active ingredients ingredients active natural 12 *Contains

Natural Ingredients Natural

*

with Pain Relief Oral Drops Oral Relief Pain

HOMEOPATHIC N DC 5 0114 -116 0 - 4

• Safe to use for more than 10 days Pain Relief Oral Drops

Drug Facts (Continued) Heel Drug Facts Warnings Believes Each 10 drops contain: If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a healthcare provider Active ingredients Purpose before use. Keep out of reach of children. If symptoms Aconitum napellus 3X...... persist or worsen, a healthcare provider should be that: * ® ...... Reduces joint and back pain consulted. Do not use if known sensitivity to Traumeel or Relief doesn’t need to *Arnica montana, radix 3X...... any of its ingredients exists...... Reduces joint and back pain come with frequent side *Belladonna 4X...... Reduces back pain Directions *Bellis perennis 2X...... Standard Dosage: Adults and children 12 years and effects which can be both- ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness older: 30 drops per day, taking 10 drops every 4 to 6 ersome or even serious. *Calendula officinalis 2X...... Relieves pain hours. Children under 12 years: Consult your healthcare Chamomilla 3X...... Soothing pain relief provider. * The healthy way to feel *Echinacea 2X...... Relieves pain Initial Dosage: Adults and children 12 years and *Echinacea purpurea 2X...... Relieves pain older: 10 drops every ½ to 1 hour until symptoms lessen, better is to strengthen FRONT *Hamamelis virginiana 2X...... then continue with standard dosage. Do not exceed 120 ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness drops in 24 hours. Children under 12 years: Consult your body’s own natural Hepar sulphuris calcareum 8X...... Relieves pain your healthcare provider. PAIN RELIEF *Hypericum perforatum 3X...... Relieves pain defenses. with PANEL Mercurius solubilis 8X...... If used in children below 18 years for more than 14 days, contact a healthcare provider as these drops contain Natural Ingredients* ...... Reduces joint and back pain alcohol. *Millefolium 3X...... Relieves pain Heel uses ingredients found *Symphytum officinale 8X.....Relieves joint pain Other Information in the natural world, so you Relieves Tamper Evident: Do not use this product if the safety ring is Uses broken away from the base of the bottle cap. can feel better about feel- For the temporary relief of minor: Store at room temperature. Protect from light. ing better. •Joint Pain Joint Pain • Back Pain • Muscular Pain Please retain outer carton for full product instructions. •Back Pain Natural ingredients www.HeelUSA.com * Inactive Ingredients These statements have not been reviewed Ethanol, Purified water •Muscular by the Food and Drug Administration. They Questions? Pain are supported by traditional homeopathic Call 1.800.920.9203 or email [email protected] principles. *Contains 12 natural active X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, Health From Nature ingredients (of 14 actives, see www.HeelUSA.com see Drug Facts*) Made and Distributed by: 1.69 fl oz. (50 ml) Heel Inc. Albuquerque, NM 87123 USA www.traumeel.us 6004064/5000 US Contains ethyl alcohol 25% by volume

Lot#: Exp:

Cust HEEL Job ORAL DROP 50ml HEEL.61B Size 2+1/8 x 1+3/4 x 4 printed Style REVERSE TUCK END 03/13/2013 Blank 9.519 x 11+53/64 BD

BI_Traumeel_OD_Carton_6004064_5000.indd 1 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 58 6/20/2013 1:49:57 PM

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 71 of 148

(of 14 actives, see Drug Facts*) Drug see actives, 14 (of

*Contains 12 natural active ingredients ingredients active natural 12 *Contains

Natural Ingredients Natural

*

with Pain Relief Tablets Relief Pain

HOMEOPATHIC NDC 50114-6150-6

Pain Relief Tablets

• Safe - works without going through the digestive system

• Safe to use for more than 10 days

Drug Facts (Continued) Heel Drug Facts Directions Each tablet contains: Standard Dosage: Adults and children 12 years and Believes Active ingredients Purpose older: 3 tablets per day, taking 1 tablet every 4 to 6 hours. *Aconitum napellus 3X..Reduces joint and back pain Children 4 to 11 years: 2 tablets per day, taking 1 tablet that: *Arnica montana, radix 3X...... every 6 to 8 hours. Children under 4 years, consult your ...... Reduces joint and back pain healthcare provider. Relief doesn’t need to come with *Belladonna 4X...... Reduces. back pain Initial Dosage: Adults and children 12 years and frequent side effects which can *Bellis perennis 2X...... older: 1 tablet every ½ to 1 hour, until symptoms lessen, ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness then continue with standard dosage. Do not exceed 12 be bothersome or even serious. PAIN RELIEF *Calendula officinalis 2X...... Relieves pain tablets in 24 hours. Children 4 to 11 years: 1 tablet with *Chamomilla 3X...... Soothing pain relief every ½ to 1 hour, until symptoms lessen, then continue The healthy way to feel better is Natural Ingredients* *Echinacea 2X...... Relieves pain with standard dosage. Do not exceed 8 tablets in 24 hours. to strengthen your body’s own *Echinacea purpurea 2X...... Relieves pain Children under 4 years, consult your healthcare provider. Hamamelis virginiana 2X...... natural defenses. * Allow tablets to dissolve completely in the mouth, do Relieves ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness not swallow. Hepar sulphuris calcareum 8X...... Relieves pain Heel uses ingredients found *Hypericum perforatum 3X...... Relieves pain Other Information: •Joint Pain Mercurius solubilis 8X...Reduces joint and back pain in the natural world, so you can *Millefolium 3X...... Relieves pain Tamper Evident: Use this product only if imprinted shrink Symphytum officinale 8X...... Relieves joint pain seal around the neck and cap is intact. feel better about feeling better. •Back Pain * Store tightly closed at room temperature. Protect from light Uses and moisture. www.HeelUSA.com •Muscular For the temporary relief of minor: Please retain outer carton for full product instructions. Pain Joint Pain • Back Pain • Muscular Pain Inactive Ingredients: Warnings Lactose, Magnesium stearate If symptoms persist or worsen, a healthcare provider *Contains 12 natural active should be consulted. Do not use if known sensitivity to ® Questions? Health From Nature ingredients (of 14 actives, Traumeel or any of its ingredients exists. Keep out of Call 1.800.920.9203 or email [email protected] see Drug Facts*) reach of children. If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a healthcare provider before use. X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, Made and Distributed by: see www.HeelUSA.com Heel Inc. *Natural ingredients These statements have not been reviewed by Albuquerque, NM 87123 USA 100 Tablets www.traumeel.us the Food and Drug Administration. They are 6002490/5001 supported by traditional homeopathic principles.

Lot#: Exp:

UNCOATED AREA

Cust HEEL Job RETAIL TABLET CARTON HEEL.55B Size 2+1/8 x 1+7/8 x 3+1/4 printed Style RTE/VERTICAL HEADER 12/10/2012 Blank 10+41/64 x 8+19/32 BD

Traumeel_Tablet Carton_6002490_5001.indd 1 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 59 6/20/2013 1:52:01 PM Traumeel xOTC_ValuePk_6044191.indd 1

• Safe - works without going through the digestive system

• Safe to use for more than 10 days Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSCDocument26-2Filed08/14/13Page72of148 ask a healthcare provider before use.feeding, askahealthcareproviderbefore For the temporary reliefofminor:For thetemporary JointPain• Uses * * * * * * * * * * ...... be applied. Forchildrenunder4, consultyourhealthcareprovider. into theskin. Ifappropriate, may mildcompressionorocclusivebandaging areas 2to3timesdaily, ormoreoftenifnecessary. thoroughly Massage toaffected generously Adults andchildren4yearsolder:Apply Directions Drug Facts -Ointment(Continued) Do notuseifknownsensitivityto Traumeel should beconsulted. Inrarecases, develop. skinreactionsmay allergic If symptomspersistorworsen, orifarashdevelops, ahealthcareprovider For external useonly. overopenwoundsorbrokenskin. Donotapply Warnings * * Active Ingredients Each 50gcontains: Drug Facts-Ointment Cetylstearyl alcohol,Cetylstearyl Ethanol, Paraffin,water and Purified Whitepetrolatum Inactive Ingredients: Please retainoutercartonforfullproductinstructions. roomtemperature.Store at Protectfromlight. Tamper isbroken. Evident:Donotuseifinnerprotectivesealundercap Other Information or contactaPoisonControlCenterrightaway. exists. Keepoutofreachchildren. Ifswallowed, getmedicalhelp Mercuriussolubilis Hepar sulphuris calcareum Symphytum officinale Millefolium Hypericum perforatum Hamamelis virginiana Echinacea purpurea Echinacea Chamomilla Calendula officinalis Bellis perennis Belladonna HOMEOPATHIC NDCNDC 50114-8505-2 50114-8505-2 Arnica montana, radix Aconitum napellus .....

Value Pack! MT...... 1X...... Reduces back pain MT Value Pack! ...... Heel MT......

. .. MT...... Relieves pain 1X (Final concentration 1X (Finalconcentration Believes 6X...... Reduces jointandbackpain MT. MT...... 4X...... MT ...... 6X...... 3X...... Soothing pain relief ...... Relieves pain ...... Relieves jointandmusclesoreness

that: ... 6X...... Relieves pain ...... Relieves pain ...... Relieves jointpain ..

Relief doesn’t need .Relieves jointandmusclesoreness ...... Relieves pain ...... Reduces jointandbackpain ..

to come with frequent Pain Relief Ointment & Tablets .. ..Reduces jointandbackpain ®

Back Pain• or any of its ingredients ofitsingredients orany

I

side effects which can f pregnantorbreast- 4X

).

be bothersome or ......

.. Muscular Pain

even serious. ....Relieves pain ...... Purpose The healthy way to feel ......

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 60 better is to strengthen ...... your body’s own

natural defenses. Heparsulphuriscalcareum8X Lactose, stearate Magnesium Inactive Ingredients: Please retainoutercartonforfullproductinstructions. roomtemperature. closedat Store tightly Protectfromlightandmoisture. Tamper isintact. ifimprintedshrinksealaroundtheneckandcap Evident:Usethisproductonly Other Information: Allow tabletstodissolvecompletelyinthemouth, donotswallow. ½to1hour, every Initial Dosage:Adultsandchildren12yearsolder:1tablet u 4 years:Consultyourhealthcareprovider. to 6hours. perday, Children4to11years:2tablets 6to8hours. every taking1tablet Children under perday,Standard Dosage:Adultsandchildren12yearsolder:3tablets 4 every taking1tablet Directions Drug Facts -Tablets (Continued) breast-feeding, use. askahealthcareproviderbefore exists.ingredients Keepoutofreachchildren.Ifpregnantor consulted. Donotuseifknownsensitivityto Traumeel If symptomspersistorworsen, ahealthcareprovidershouldbe Warnings reliefofminor:For thetemporary JointPain• Uses * * * * * * * * * * * * Active Ingredients Each tabletcontains: Drug Facts-Tablets exceed 8 tablets in24hours.exceed 8tablets Childrenunder4years, consultyourhealthcareprovider. ½to1hour, every years: 1tablet untilsymptomslessen, thencontinuewithstandarddosage. Donot lessen, thencontinuewithstandarddosage. in24hours. Donotexceed12tablets Children4to11 Mercuriussolubilis8X Symphytum officinale8X 3X Millefolium 3X Hypericum perforatum 2X Hamamelis virginiana Echinacea purpurea2X Echinacea 2X Chamomilla 3X Calendula officinalis2X Bellis perennis2X Belladonna 4X Arnica montana, radix3X 3X Aconitum napellus Heel uses ingredients FRONT

found in the natural ......

...... world, so you can PANEL ...... feel better about ......

feeling better. PAIN RELIEF THATwith DOESN’T HURT * ...... Natural Ingredients Relieves jointandmusclesoreness www.HeelUSA.com Relieves jointandmusclesoreness

Back Pain• Reduces jointandbackpain Reduces jointandbackpain Relieves Reduces jointandbackpain Soothing painrelief Reduces backpain

Relieves jointpain •Joint Pain Muscular Pain ®

Relieves pain Relieves pain Relieves pain Relieves pain or any ofits orany Relieves pain Relieves pain •Back Pain Purpose •Muscular Pain www.HeelUSA.com information, see dilution. Formore X isahomeopathic principles. homeopathic by traditional They aresupported Administration. Food andDrug reviewed bythe have notbeen These statements *Contains 12 natural active ingredients * [email protected] or email 1.800.920.9203 Questions? Call (of 14 actives, see Drug Facts*) ingredients Natural ntil symptoms Health From Nature Package includes: Traumeel® 100 Tablets Traumeel®x Ointment: www.traumeel.us Net Wt. 1.76 oz. (50g)

Traumeel®x Ointment: Made in Germany Manufactured for and Distributed by: Heel Inc. Albuquerque, NM 87123 USA Traumeel® Tablets: Made and Distributed by: Heel Inc. Albuquerque, NM 87123 USA www.traumeel.us 6044191/1.0

Lot#: Exp: 6/20/2013 1:58:22 PM

Cust HEEL Job TRAUMEEL COMBO - MAIL LOCK HEEL.48B Size 2+7/8 x 1+23/32 x 5.275 printed Style STRAIGHT TUCK END 02/14/2012 Blank 13.658 x 12+45/64 BD Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 73 of 148 HOMEOPATHIC NDC 50114-8015-4 Active Ingredients: Each 250 g contains: *Aconitum napellus 1X (Final concentration 4X), *Arnica montana, radix 3X, *Belladonna 1X, *Bellis perennis MT, *Calendula officinalis MT, *Chamomilla MT, *Echinacea MT, *Echinacea purpurea MT, *Hamamelis virgin- iana MT, Hepar sulphuris calcareum 6X, *Hypericum perforatum 6X, Mercurius solubilis 6X,*Millefolium MT, *Symphytum officinale 4X. Uses: For the temporary relief of minor: Joint Pain • Back Pain • Muscular Pain Warnings: For external use only. Do not apply over open wounds or broken skin. If symptoms persist or worsen, Pain Relief GelGel or if a rash develops, a healthcare provider should be consulted. In rare cases, allergic skin reactions may develop. Do not use if known sensitivity to Traumeel® or any of its ingredients exists. Keep out of reach of children. If swallowed, get medical help or 100% contact a Poison Control Center right away. If pregnant or breast- SIZE: 120,0 x 80,0 mm feeding, ask a healthcare provider before use. 7-SEP-12 heel traumeel gel 250g Directions: Adults and children 4 years and older: Apply 203307 401434 pain relief usa NDC 50114-8015-4 generously to affected areas 2-3 times daily, or more often if 058763 necessary. Massage thoroughly into the skin. If appropriate, mild compression or occlusive bandaging may be applied. For children under 4, consult your healthcare provider. Tamper Evident: Do not use if seal around entire bottle is broken or missing. Store at room temperature. Protect from light. Inactive Ingredients: Carbopol 980, Ethanol, Purified water and Sodium hydroxide *Natural ingredients PAIN RELIEF X is a homeopathic dilution. with For more information, see Natural Ingredients* www.HeelUSA.com These statements have not been reviewed by the Food Relieves and Drug Administration. They are supported by traditional •Joint Pain Health From Nature homeopathic principles.

•Back Pain Made in Belgium Manufactured for and Distributed by: •Muscular Heel Inc. Pain Gel Albuquerque, NM 87123 USA www.traumeel.us

*Contains 12 natural Questions? active ingredients Call 1.800.920.9203 (of 14 actives) or email [email protected] Net Wt. 8.75 oz. (250g)

Traumeel x_250g_5x6US.indd 1 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 61 6/20/2013 1:50:39 PM

Ed. 10/04/2012 14:20 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 74 of 148

TOP/OBEN

R Design Size/Stanzausdehnung: 235.50 x 247.26 Heel 6280107 X X X = Ritzlinie 54.00 x 32.50 x 134.25 mm • Safe - works without going through X the digestive system 250 22.25 R = Rueckseite aussparen • Safe to use for more than 10 days • Odorless ointment

HOMEOPATHIC NDC 51885-7125-3 Drug Facts Each 50 g contains: Active Ingredients Purpose Heel *Aconitum napellus 1X (Final concentration 4X) ...... Reduces joint and back pain BelievesR *Arnica montana, radix 3X ...... Reduces joint and back pain *Belladonna 1X ...... Reduces back pain that: *Bellis perennis MT ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness *Calendula officinalisMT ...... Relieves pain Relief doesn’t Pain Relief Ointment *Chamomilla MT ...... Soothing pain relief Pain Relief Ointment Echinacea MT ...... Relieves pain need to come with * with *Echinacea purpurea MT ...... Relieves pain frequent side Natural *Hamamelis virginiana MT ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness * *Hepar sulphuris calcareum 6X ...... Relieves pain effects which can Ingredients *Hypericum perforatum 6X ...... Relieves pain 190.75 be bothersome or *Mercurius solubilis 6X ...... Reduces joint and back pain *Millefolium MT ...... Relieves pain even serious. *Symphytum officinale4X ...... Relieves joint pain The healthy way Uses For the temporary relief of minor: to feel better is Joint Pain · Back Pain · Muscular Pain to strengthen your Warnings body’s own natural For external use only. Do not apply over open wounds or broken skin. If symptoms persist or worsen, or if a rash develops, defenses. a healthcare provider should be consulted. In rare cases, allergic skin reactions may develop. Do not use if known sensitivity to 134.25 247.25 X Traumeel® or any of its ingredients exists. Keep out of reach Heel uses ingredi- of children. If swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison ents found in the Control Center right away. If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a healthcare provider before use. natural world, so PAIN RELIEF you can feel with Directions THAT Natural DOESN’T Ingredients HURT * Adults and children 4 years and older: Apply generously to Mat.no.: 078111 nerapssua etieskceu R/Ebetter S R about E V E R H SIN R A Vnerapssua O N etieskceu R/E S R Eaffected V Eareas R2 to 3 Htimes SINdaily, or more R often A if Vnecessary. O N Relieves Massage thoroughly into the skin. If appropriate, mild compression Version: 5001 feeling better. or occlusive bandaging may be applied. For children under 4, Relieves consult your healthcare provider. www.HeelUSA.com • Joint Pain Code: 21 Other Information nerapssua etieskceu R/E S R E V E R H SIN R A V O N • Joint Pain • Back Pain Tamper Evident: Do not use if inner protective seal under cap Size: 54 x 32,5 x 134,25 mm • Back Pain is broken. • Muscular Store at room temperature. Protect from light. Flm: – • Muscular Pain Please retain outer carton for full product instructions. Pain Inactive Ingredients: Type size: ≥ 5 Punkt Health From Nature *Contains 12 natural active Cetylstearyl alcohol, Ethanol, Paraffin, Purified water and White ingredients (of 14 actives, petrolatum. R see Drug Facts*) Colours: CMYK Made in Germany *Contains 12 natural active Manufactured for and ingredients (of 14 actives, Questions? These statements have not Call 1.800.920.9203 or email [email protected] Distributed by: see Drug Facts*) been reviewed by the Food Heel Inc. and Drug Administration. They *Natural ingredients Albuquerque, NM 87123 are supported by traditional X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, see USA Net Wt. 1.76 oz. (50g) www.traumeel.us homeopathic principles. www.HeelUSA.com 078111/5001 GP

Exp. date: Lot: 1. Proof ___19.06.2013______X 2. Proof ___20.06.2013______X X

R

❒ ❒ Correction necessary

16 31.5 15 32.5 54 32.5 53.5 ❒ Approved for printing ❒ Valid until ______235.5 ❒ Valid until further note

Date/Signature

______

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 62 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 75 of 148

TOP/OBEN

R Design Size/Stanzausdehnung: 235.50 x 247.26 Heel 6280107 X X X = Ritzlinie Gel 54.00 x 32.50 x 134.25 mm X • Safe - works without going through the digestive system 250 22.25 R = Rueckseite aussparen • Safe to use for more than 10 days

HOMEOPATHIC NDC 51885-8130-3 Drug Facts Each 50 g contains: Active Ingredients Purpose Heel *Aconitum napellus 1X (Final concentration 4x) ...... Reduces joint and back pain Believes *Arnica montana, radix 3X ...... Reduces joint and back pain R *Belladonna 1X ...... Reduces back pain that: *Bellis perennis MT ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness *Calendula officinalis MT ...... Relieves pain Relief doesn’t Pain Relief Gel *Chamomilla MT ...... Soothing pain relief Pain Relief Gel *Echinacea MT ...... Relieves pain need to come with Echinacea purpurea MT ...... Relieves pain with * frequent side Natural *Hamamelis virginiana MT ...... Relieves joint and muscle soreness *Hepar sulphuris calcareum 6X ...... Relieves pain effects which can Ingredients* *Hypericum perforatum 6X ...... Relieves pain 190.75 be bothersome or *Mercurius solubilis 6X ...... Reduces joint and back pain *Millefolium MT ...... Relieves pain even serious. *Symphytum officinale 4X ...... Relieves joint pain The healthy way Uses For the temporary relief of minor: to feel better is Joint Pain · Back Pain · Muscular Pain to strengthen your Warnings body’s own natural For external use only. Do not apply over open wounds or broken skin. If symptoms persist or worsen, or if a rash develops, defenses. a healthcare provider should be consulted. In rare cases, allergic skin reactions may develop. Do not use if known sensitivity to 134.25 247.25 Traumeel® or any of its ingredients exists. Keep out of reach X Heel uses ingredi- of children. If swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison ents found in the Control Center right away. If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a healthcare provider before use. natural world, so withPAIN RELIEF Directions you can feel THAT Natural DOESN’T Ingredients HURT * Adults and children 4 years and older: Apply generously to Mat.no.: 078676 nerapssua etieskceu R/Ebetter S R about E V E R H SIN R A Vnerapssua O N etieskceu R/E S R Eaffected V areas E R2 to 3 Htimes SINdaily, or more R often A if necessary. V O N Massage thoroughly into the skin. If appropriate, mild compression Version: 5001 feeling better. Relieves or occlusive bandaging may be applied. For children under 4, Relieves consult your healthcare provider. www.HeelUSA.com • Joint Pain Code: 109 Other Information nerapssua etieskceu R/E S R E V E R H SIN R A V O N • Joint Pain • Back Pain Tamper Evident: Do not use if inner protective seal under cap Size: 54 x 32,5 x 134,25 mm • Back Pain is broken. • Muscular Store at room temperature. Protect from light. Flm: – • Muscular Pain Please retain outer carton for full product instructions. Pain Inactive Ingredients: Type size: ≥ 5 Punkt Health From Nature *Contains 12 natural active Carbopol 980, Ethanol, Purified water and Sodium hydroxide. Gel ingredients (of 14 actives, R see Drug Facts*) Questions? Colours: CMYK Made in Germany *Contains 12 natural active ingredients (of 14 actives, Call 1.800.920.9203 or email [email protected] Manufactured for and These statements have not Distributed by: see Drug Facts*) been reviewed by the Food Heel Inc. and Drug Administration. They *Natural ingredients Albuquerque, NM 87123 are supported by traditional X is a homeopathic dilution. For more information, see USA Net Wt. 1.76 oz. (50g) www.traumeel.us homeopathic principles. www.HeelUSA.com 078676/5001 GP

Exp. date: Lot: 1. Proof __19.06.2013______X 2. Proof __20.06.2013______X X

R gel upc code 75%.indd 1 11/26/2012 10:21:42 AM

❒ ❒ Correction necessary

16 31.5 15 32.5 54 32.5 53.5 ❒ Approved for printing ❒ Valid until ______235.5 ❒ Valid until further note

Date/Signature

______

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 63 275.48 168.28 26.55 26.55 www.HeelUSA.com feeling better. better about feel you can so natural world, the in found ingredients Heel uses defenses. natural own body’s your to strengthen is better to feel way healthy The even serious. bothersome or be can which side effects frequent with need to come USA Albuquerque, NM87123 Heel Inc. Distributed by: Manufactured forand Made inGermany Relief doesn’t that: Believes Heel nerapssua etieskceuR/ESREVER HSINRAV ON HSINRAV etieskceuR/ESREVER nerapssua Health FromNature 37.35

HOMEOPATHIC Pain Relief Ointment • Muscular • Back Pain • JointPain *Contains 12 natural active active 12 natural *Contains THAT HURT DOESN’T with PAIN RELIEF see Drug Facts*) Drug see 14 (of actives, ingredients Net Wt. 3.53oz. o • Odorless 10 days than more for use to • Safe system digestive the through going without -works • Safe Relieves Pain

Natural* Ingredients Faserrichtung Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSCDocument26-2Filed08/14/13Page76of148 TOP/OBEN intment 53.97

(100g) NDC 51885-7125-1 www.traumeel.us

199.39 * Contains 12 natural active ingredients ingredients active 12 natural Contains * Pain Relief Ointment (of 14 actives, see Drug Facts*) Drug see 14(of actives, traditional homeopathicprinciples. Administration. They are supportedby reviewed bytheFood andDrug These statementshavenotbeen * Ingredients with • Muscular • Back Pain • JointPain Relieves

Natural Pain 38.1 Design Size/Stanzausdehnung:199.39x275.48 EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 64

53.97 x38.10168.28mm Exp. date: date: Exp. * www.HeelUSA.com 078654/5001 GP X isahomeopathicdilution. For more information, see Natural ingredients Control Center right away. If pregnant away. or breast-feeding, right Center Control ask a healthcare provider before use. use. before provider ahealthcare ask Please retain outer carton for full product instructions. Store at from light. room temperature. Protect broken. is of children. if known sensitivity to Traumeel to sensitivity known if use not Do develop. may reactions skin allergic cases, rare In consulted. be should provider a healthcare develops, arash if or worsen, or persist symptoms If skin. broken or wounds open over apply not Do only. use external For Warnings Joint Pain minor: of relief temporary the For Uses Call Questions? White petrolatum. and water Purified Paraffin, Ethanol, alcohol, Cetylstearyl Ingredients: Inactive Tamper Evident: Information Other * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Active Ingredients Each 100gcontains: Facts Drug Adults and children 4 years and older: Directions consult yourhealthcareprovider. or occlusive bandaging may be applied. For children under4, Massage thoroughlyintotheskin. Ifappropriate, mildcompression affected areas2to3timesdaily, ormoreoftenifnecessary. Symphytum officinale Symphytum Millefolium Mercurius solubilis Hypericum perforatum Hepar sulphuriscalcareum Hamamelis virginiana Echinacea purpurea Echinacea Chamomilla officinalis Calendula Bellis perennis Belladonna Arnica montana, radix (Final concentration 4X)...... Reducesjointandbackpain Aconitum napellus [email protected] email or 1.800.920.9203 ® · Keep out of reach reach of out Keep exists. ingredients its of any or Back Pain Pain Back MT ...... Relievespain

1X ...... Reducesbackpain MT ...... Relievespain 6280110 If swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison aPoison contact or help medical get swallowed, If MT ...... Soothingpainrelief MT

Heel Do not use if inner protective seal under cap cap under seal protective inner if use not Do 53.97 6X ...... Reducesjointandbackpain ...... Relievesjointandmusclesoreness 1X 250 MT ..... MT ...... Relievespain · MT ...... Relievesjointandmusclesoreness 4X ...... 3X ...... Reducesjointandbackpain Muscular Pain 6X ...... 6X ...... Relievespain ...... Relievespain ...... Apply generously to to generously Apply

Relieves jointpain Purpose Relieves pain Lot:

16 Colours: Type size: Flm: Size: Code: Version: ______Date/Signature ❒ ❒ ❒ ❒ ❒ 3. Proof___24.06.2013______2. Proof___20.06.2013______1. Proof___19.06.2013______Mat.no.:

Valid untilfurthernote Valid until______Approved forprinting Correction necessary

CMYK ≥ 6Punkt – ? mm 24 5001 078654

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 77 of 148

EXHIBIT F

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 65 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 78 of 148 Homeopathic Dilutions

What does the “X” after a homeopathic ingredient mean? • The “X” refers to the level of concentration or dilution of the basic medicinal substance which was used to make the finished product. A basic medicinal substance may be a “Mother tincture” of a plant or animal or the mineral itself. • 1X means the dilution contains 1 part basic medicinal substance combined with 9 parts of diluent • 2X means the dilution contains 1 part of a 1X tincture with 9 parts diluent. So a 2X dilution is 1 part basic medicinal substance and 99 parts diluent or 1 % a extract, as shown below: Mother Tincture Concentration Levels: • 1X: 1 part in 10 or 10% • 2X: 1 part in 100 or 1% • 3X: 1 part in 1000 or 0.1% • 4X: 1 part in 10,000 or 0.01% • … and so on.

Other abbreviations: • “MT” means “Mother Tincture” (described above). Most Mother Tinctures are a 10% extract of the pure plant or animal and generally are designated as a 1X potency. • “MT(N)” means that the Mother Tincture for this ingredient in the product contained a 33% extract of the pure plant. • “MT(M)” means that the Mother Tincture for this ingredient in the product contained a 50% extract of the pure plant.

For more information on homeopathic drugs, please see the following link: http://www.fda.gov/iceci/compliancemanuals/compliancepolicyguidancemanual/ucm074360.htm

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 66 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 79 of 148

EXHIBIT G

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 67 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 80 of 148

Mason v. Heel Class Action Administration & Notification Plan

Website & Claims Administration $20,000

Online Notice $91,000

CLRA Notice $15,000

Print Notice $68,000

Total $194,000*

* subject to limits on number of interactions, and supplementary services as detailed herein.

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 68 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 81 of 148

Claims Administration Website • Custom website setup • Online claim filing functionality with 128 bit encryption • Website updates and maintenance • Downloadable claim form (English & Spanish) $2,000

Phone / Email • Vanity toll-free number e.g. 800-heel-case (subject to availability) (up to 12 months, maximum of 1,000 interactions – additional @$0.50) • Setup digit IVR system with 24 hours recorded message & updates • Live customer service representative (up to 12 months, max. 500 interactions – add’l interactions @ $4.50) • Class member communications (up to 12 months, max. of 500 interactions – add’l interactions @ $4.50) $3,000

Postal Mail • Setup dedicated Post Office Box • Retrieve, sort, and image incoming correspondence (maximum 500 pieces – additional @ $0.50) • Respond to correspondence (maximum 200 pieces – additional @ $5.00) • Mail paper claim forms $2,000

Claim Processing • Setup dedicated secure claim database • Claim form data entry & processing (maximum of 5,000 – additional units @ $0.60) $2,500

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 69 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 82 of 148

Claim Validation • Check claims for validity • Flag fraudulent claims (duplicate name, address, IP Address) (Maximum of 5,000 – additional units @$0.10) $1,000

Claim Distribution • Print and mail checks (Maximum of 5,000 – additional units @$1.50) • Check reissues (Maximum of 200 – additional units @$2.00) • Re-send undeliverables (Maximum of 200 – additional units @$5.00) $7,500

Case Finalization • Final disbursement reporting • Cy-près distribution • Notice plan declaration • Final approval declaration $2,000

Total $20,000

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 70 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 83 of 148

Online Media Press Release • PR Newswire (United States Level 1 + Social Media) $2,000

Online Banner Advertisements • Google Display Network (60 days) (Network includes national outlets such as USAtoday.com, Time.com, and USnews.com. Also includes regional outlets such as LAtimes.com, CBS2.com, FresnoBee.com, and FOX5SanDiego.com. And relevant interest group websites such as WebMD.com, and MensHealth.com) • Facebook (60 days) • Yahoo Display Network (60 days) • MSN Display Network (60 days) • Minimum of 100,000,000 impressions $85,000

Consumer Class Action Websites ClassActionRebates.com, TopClassActions.com $4,000

Total $91,000

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 71 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 84 of 148

Print Media CLRA Notice • San Diego Tribune (Metro & North) (1/4th Page) x 4 $15,000

National Magazines* • Prevention (circ. 2,900,000) (full page) $50,000

National News Media* • New York Times (M-F) (circ. 1,800,000) (1/6th page) $18,000

* Print media prices subject to change. Availability and approval may constrain selection. SEOmap assumes responsibility for pricing changes up to 5% above quoted rate. For price changes beyond 5%, client to bear additional cost, or mutually agreeable substitute publication.

Supplementary • File QSF Tax Return $1,500 • Prepare / print / mail claim deficiency letters $1.50 / letter • Supplemental distributions $1.50 / check • Court appearance Expenses + $325/hour

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 72 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 85 of 148

EXHIBIT H

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 73

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 86 of 148

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT A. MASON, on behalf of CASE NO. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC himself, all others similarly situated and CLASS ACTION 12 the general public, Filed: December 21, 2012 13 Plaintiff, ORDER PRELIMINARILY 14 APPROVING CLASS ACTION 15 v. SETTLEMENT, CERTIFYING THE CLASS, APPOINTING 16 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico CLASS REPRESENTATIVE 17 Corporation, AND CLASS COUNSEL, APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, 18 Defendant. AND SETTING FINAL 19 APPROVAL HEARING

20 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel Date: 21 Time: 22 Dept.: 2D

23 24 25 26 27 28

Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC PRELIMINARY APPROVAL ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 74 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 87 of 148

1 Plaintiff Robert A. Mason and Defendant Heel, Inc. in this action (the 2 “Parties”), styled Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC (KSC) (S.D. 3 Cal.) (the “Litigation”), after arms-length settlement discussions have entered into 4 a Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) dated ______, 2013, which, if 5 approved, would resolve this putative class action. 6 The capitalized terms used in this Preliminary Approval Order shall have the 7 meanings and/or definitions given to them in the Agreement, or if not defined 8 therein, the meanings and/or definitions given to them in this Preliminary Approval 9 Order. 10 Before and during the pendency of the Litigation, Class Counsel conducted 11 an extensive examination and evaluation of the relevant facts and law to assess the 12 merits of the named Plaintiff’s and Class’ claims to determine how best to serve 13 the interests of Plaintiff and the Class. In the course of this extensive examination, 14 Class Counsel reviewed approximately ______documents, which consisted of 15 marketing data, label and package mechanicals, sales figures, unit sales, 16 promotional materials, package materials, clinical studies regarding the Products, 17 list of doctors recommending the Products, distributors and their invoices for the 18 Products during the class period, and detailed financial information produced by 19 Defendant. Class Counsel has conducted thorough review of the federal Food, 20 Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), its numerous changes over the years, and the 21 FDCA’s implementing regulations with respect to homeopathic drugs, which 22 California law adopts as its own. See Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 110105, 23 110110, 110111, 110115. Class Counsel has carefully considered the merits of 24 Plaintiff’s claims, and the defenses raised by Defendant. 25 The Parties also fully briefed Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s 26 claims, brought on grounds, inter alia, that Plaintiff’s Complaint lacked 27 plausibility and particularity under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 9(b); 28 made what Defendant termed “lack of substantiation” claims; and that the FDCA

1

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 75

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 88 of 148

1 preempted Plaintiff’s claims. See Dkt. Nos. 6, 10, 11, 13-15, 23. 2 The proposed settlement was reached only after this extensive investigation 3 and discovery in the Litigation, and was the result of protracted negotiations 4 conducted by the Parties with the assistance of Judge Leo Papas (Ret.). The 5 Parties engaged in numerous joint and individual mediations sessions with Judge 6 Papas in order to reach the terms of the Agreement over the course of several 7 months. Based on the motion to dismiss briefing, which was extensive, the Parties 8 also fully understood the nature, strength, and weaknesses of each other’s claims 9 and defenses. See id. 10 Plaintiff and Class Counsel maintain that the Litigation and the claims 11 asserted therein are meritorious and that Plaintiff and the Class would have 12 prevailed at trial. Notwithstanding, Plaintiff and Class Counsel have agreed to 13 settle the Litigation pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement, after considering, 14 among other things: (i) the substantial benefits to Plaintiff and the Class under the 15 terms of this Agreement; (ii) the uncertainty of being able to prevail at trial; (iii) 16 the uncertainty relating to Defendants’ defenses and the expense of additional 17 motion practice in connection therewith; (iv) the issues relating to proving 18 damages on an individual Class Member basis; (v) the attendant risks of litigation, 19 especially in complex actions such as this, as well as the difficulties and delays 20 inherent in such litigation; and (vi) the desirability of consummating this 21 Settlement promptly in order to provide effective relief to Plaintiff and the Class. 22 Plaintiff and Class Counsel agree that this Agreement is fair, reasonable and 23 adequate because it provides substantial benefits to the Class, is in the best 24 interests of the Class, and fairly resolves the claims alleged in this Litigation. 25 Defendant expressly denies any wrongdoing alleged in the pleadings in the 26 Litigation, and does not admit or concede any actual or potential fault, 27 wrongdoing, or liability in connection with any facts or claims which have been 28 or could have been alleged against it in the Litigation. Defendant nonetheless

2

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 76

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 89 of 148

1 considers it desirable for the Litigation to be settled and dismissed, because the 2 proposed settlement will: (i) avoid further expense and disruption of the 3 management and operation of Defendant’s business due to the pendency and 4 defense of the Litigation; (ii) finally put Plaintiff’s and the Class’ claims and the 5 underlying matters to rest; and (iii) avoid the substantial expense, burdens, and 6 uncertainties associated with a potential finding of liability and damages for 7 Plaintiff and the Class on the claims alleged in the Complaint in the Litigation. 8 The court has read and considered the Agreement and all exhibits thereto, 9 including the proposed notices and claim form, and finds there is sufficient basis 10 for: (1) granting preliminary approval of the Agreement; (2) certifying a class for 11 settlement purposes; (3) appointing Plaintiff Robert A. Mason as Class 12 Representative and his counsel as Class Counsel; (4) directing that Notice be 13 disseminated to the Class; and (5) setting a hearing at which the Court will 14 consider whether to grant final approval of the Agreement. 15 The Court now GRANTS the motion for preliminary approval and makes 16 the following findings and orders: 17 1. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 the Court hereby 18 certifies this Litigation as a class action on behalf of the following certified Class: 19 All U.S. consumers who purchased the Products listed in Exhibit D to the 20 Agreement, for household or personal use, during the Class Period (as 21 defined by Paragraph 1.7 of the Agreement) are included. Excluded from the Class are: Heel; persons who during or after the Class Period were 22 officers or directors of Heel, or any corporation, trust or other entity in 23 which Heel has a controlling interest; Heel employees; the members of the immediate families of Heel employees or their successors, heirs, assigns and 24 legal representatives; and any judicial officer hearing this Litigation, as well 25 as their immediate family members and employees. 26 2. The Court finds that the Class meets the requirements of Rule 23(a), 27 (b)(2), and (b)(3) of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Joinder of all Class 28 Members in a single proceeding would be impracticable, if not impossible, because

3

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 77

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 90 of 148

1 of their numbers and dispersion. Common issues exist among Class Members and 2 predominate over questions affecting individual Class Members only. In 3 particular, each Class Member’s claim depends on whether the representations 4 made by Defendant on the packaging, labeling and marketing of the Products, 5 which were uniform throughout the United States, were misleading to a reasonable 6 consumer. The Plaintiff’s claims are typical of, indeed identical, to those of the 7 Class, as Plaintiff was exposed to Defendant’s claims and purchased the Products 8 in reliance on those claims. The Plaintiff and his counsel will fairly and adequately 9 protect the interests of the Class, as Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to the 10 Class, and has retained counsel who are experienced and competent to prosecute 11 this matter on behalf of the Class. Finally, a class settlement is superior to other 12 methods available for a fair resolution of the controversy. 13 3. The Court approves Plaintiff Robert A. Mason as Class 14 Representative. 15 4. Having considered the factors set forth in Rule 23(g)(1) of the Federal 16 Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court appoints Plaintiff’s counsel, the Law Offices of 17 Ronald A. Marron, APLC to serve as Class Counsel. 18 5. The Court preliminarily approves the Agreement, finding that its 19 terms appear sufficient, fair, reasonable and adequate to warrant dissemination of 20 Notice of the proposed settlement to the Class. The Agreement contains no 21 obvious deficiencies and the parties have entered into the Agreement in good faith, 22 following arms-length negotiation between their respective counsel. The Court’s 23 approval of this Agreement is made subject to further consideration at the Final 24 Approval Hearing Date. 25 6. Pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the 26 Court will hold a final approval hearing (the “Final Approval Hearing Date”) on 27 ______, 2013 at ______a.m./p.m., in the Courtroom of the 28

4

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 78

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 91 of 148

1 Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel, United States District Court for the Southern District 2 of California, for the following purposes: 3 a. finally determining whether the Class meets all applicable 4 requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b), and, 5 thus, the Class’ claims should be certified for purposes of effectuating 6 the Settlement; 7 b. determining whether the proposed Settlement of the Litigation on the 8 terms and conditions provided for in the Agreement is fair, 9 reasonable, and adequate and should be approved by the Court; 10 c. considering the application of Class Counsel for an award of 11 attorneys’ fees and costs, as provided for in the Agreement; 12 d. considering the application of the named Plaintiff for a class 13 representative incentive award, as provided for in the Agreement; 14 e. considering whether the Court should enter the [Proposed] Judgment, 15 Final Order and Decree; 16 f. considering whether the release by the Class Members of the Released 17 Claims as set forth in the Agreement should be provided; and 18 g. ruling upon such matters as the Court may deem just and appropriate. 19 7. Class Members must file and serve any objections to the proposed 20 settlement no later than thirty (30) days prior to the Final Approval Hearing Date, 21 including any memoranda and/or submissions in support of the objections, which 22 deadline will be set forth in the Class Notice. 23 8. All papers in support of the Agreement must be filed with the Court 24 and served at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Final Approval Hearing 25 date. Any response to an objection must be filed and served at least seven (7) days 26 prior to the Final Approval Hearing date. 27 9. Any application for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs and class 28 representative incentive award must be filed with the Court and served at least

5

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 79

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 92 of 148

1 forty-five (45) days prior to the Final Approval Hearing date. After filing, the 2 application for fees and costs, and incentive award shall be posted on the 3 Settlement Website for review by Class Members. 4 10. The Court approves the form and procedure for disseminating Notice 5 of the proposed Settlement to the Class as set forth in the Agreement. This 6 Litigation concerns retail products for which the Parties do not have direct notice 7 information for class members. Accordingly, the Notice Plan provides for notice 8 to the Class by publication. The Court finds that the Notice Plan submitted by the 9 Parties constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and 10 constitutes valid and sufficient notice to the Class in full compliance with the 11 requirements of applicable law, including Rule 23 and the Due Process Clause of 12 the United States Constitution. 13 11. Within thirty (30) days after the date of entry of this Order, the 14 Defendants shall disseminate the Class Notice in the form attached to the 15 Agreement as Exhibit B, Summary Notice in the form attached thereto as Exhibit 16 C, and the Claim Form in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. The manner and 17 form of such dissemination shall be as set forth in the Notice Plan attached as 18 Exhibit G to the Agreement. 19 12. The Court approves the designation of SEOmap to serve as the Court- 20 Appointed Class Action Administrator for the settlement. The Class Action 21 Administrator shall disseminate Class Notice and supervise and carry out the 22 Notice Plan, the processing of claims, and other administrative functions, and shall 23 respond to Class Member inquiries under the direction and supervision of the 24 Court. 25 13. The Court directs the Class Action Administrator to establish a Class 26 Settlement Website, making available copies of this Order, Class Notice, Claim 27 Forms that may be downloaded and submitted online or via mail, the Agreement 28 and all exhibits thereto, a toll-free hotline, and such other information as may be of

6

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 80

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 93 of 148

1 assistance to Class Members or required under the Agreement. The Claim Form 2 shall be made available to Class Members through the Class Settlement Website, 3 no later than fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of this Order, and 4 continuously thereafter through the Claim-In Period (defined below). 5 14. As set forth in the Agreement, the costs and expenses associated with 6 the Class Notice, processing of claims, creating and maintaining the Class 7 Settlement Website, and all other Class Action Administrator and Class Notice 8 expenses shall be paid from the Settlement Fund. The Class Action Administrator 9 is authorized to receive reimbursement of its out-of-pocket notice publication 10 expenses from the Settlement Fund pursuant to this Order, with Class Counsel’s 11 approval. 12 15. No later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Final Approval Hearing 13 Date, Defendant, through the Class Action Administrator, shall file an affidavit and 14 serve a copy on Class Counsel, attesting that notice was disseminated as required 15 by the terms of the Notice Plan or as ordered by the Court. Defendant shall also 16 notify Class Counsel of the costs of attaining the labeling changes per the 17 injunctive relief set forth in the Agreement. 18 16. All Class Members shall be bound by all determinations and 19 judgments in the Litigation concerning the settlement, whether favorable or 20 unfavorable to the Class. 21 17. Any Class Member who wishes to participate in the settlement shall 22 complete a Claim Form and submit it to the Class Action Administrator no later 23 than ninety (90) days after the date the Court enters the final judgment approving 24 the settlement (“Claim-In Period”). Such deadline may be further extended 25 without notice to the Class by Court order. 26 18. Any person falling within the definition of the Class may, upon his or 27 her request, be excluded from the Class. Any such person must submit a 28 completed request for exclusion to the Clerk of the Court postmarked or delivered

7

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 81

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 94 of 148

1 no later than thirty (30) calendar days before the Final Approval Hearing date 2 (“Opt-Out and Objection Deadline”), as set forth in the Class Notice. Requests 3 for exclusion purportedly filed on behalf of groups of persons are prohibited and 4 will be deemed void. 5 19. Any Class Member who does not send a completed, signed request for 6 exclusion to the Clerk of the Court postmarked or delivered on or before the Opt- 7 Out and Objection Deadline will be deemed to be a Class Member for all purposes 8 and will be bound by all further orders of the Court in this Litigation and by the 9 terms of the settlement, if finally approved by the Court. The written request for 10 exclusion must request exclusion from the Class, must be signed by the potential 11 Class Member and include a statement indicating that the person is a member of 12 the Class. All persons who submit valid and timely requests for exclusion shall 13 not be bound by the Agreement or the Final Judgment and Order. 14 20. Any person falling within the definition of the Class may object to the 15 Agreement. Objections purportedly filed on behalf of groups of persons are 16 prohibited and will be deemed void. To be considered, all objections must be 17 timely, in writing, signed and dated by the objector (or his or her attorney, if 18 applicable), must reference the abbreviated name and case number of the 19 Litigation, and must contain the following information: (i) the objector’s name, 20 address, and telephone number; (ii) the name, address, and telephone number of 21 any attorney for the objector with respect to the objection; (iii) the factual basis and 22 legal grounds for the objection; (iv) identification of the case name, case number, 23 and court for any prior class action lawsuit in which the objector has objected to a 24 proposed class action settlement, the general nature of such prior objection(s), and 25 the outcome of said prior objection(s); (v) identification of the case name, case 26 number, and court for any prior class action lawsuit in which the objector and the 27 objector’s attorney (if applicable) has objected to a proposed class action 28 settlement, the general nature of such prior objection(s), and the outcome of said

8

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 82

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 95 of 148

1 prior objection(s); (vi) the payment terms of any fee agreement between the 2 objector and the objector’s attorney with respect to the objection; and (vii) any 3 attorneys’ fee sharing agreement or referral fee agreement between or among the 4 objector, the objector’s attorney, and/or any third party, including any other 5 attorney or law firm, with respect to the objection. 6 21. A request for exclusion or an objection that does not include all of the 7 foregoing information, that is sent to an address other than the one designated in 8 the Class Notice, or that is not received within the time specified, shall be invalid 9 and the person serving such a request shall be deemed a member of the Class, and 10 shall be bound as a Class Member by the Agreement. The Class Action 11 Administrator shall promptly forward copies of all requests for exclusion and 12 objections to Class Counsel and counsel for Defendant. 13 22. If a Class Member hires an attorney to represent him or her in support 14 of a timely and properly submitted objection, and the attorney wishes to appear at 15 the Final Approval Hearing, in addition to the foregoing requirements, that 16 attorney must (1) file both an entry of appearance and a notice of intention to 17 appear and participate at the Final Approval Hearing with the Clerk of the Court no 18 later than thirty (30) calendar days before the Final Approval Hearing, and (2) mail 19 copies of the entry of appearance and the notice of intention to appear and 20 participate at the Final Approval Hearing to Counsel for Defendant and Class 21 Counsel, postmarked no later than thirty (30) calendar days before the Final 22 Approval Hearing. 23 23. A Class Member who appears at the Final Approval Hearing, either 24 personally or through counsel, will be permitted to argue only those matters that 25 were set forth in the timely and validly submitted written objection filed by such 26 Class Member. No Class Member shall be permitted to raise matters at the Final 27 Approval Hearing that the Class Member could have raised in his/her written 28

9

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 83

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 96 of 148

1 objection, but failed to do so, and all objections to the Agreement that are not set 2 forth in a timely and validly submitted written objection are deemed waived. 3 24. If a Class Member wishes to present witnesses or evidence at the Final 4 Approval Hearing in support of a timely and validly submitted objection, all 5 witnesses must be identified in the objection, and true and correct copies of all 6 supporting evidence must be appended to, or filed and served with, the objection. 7 Failure to identify witnesses or provide copies of supporting evidence in this 8 manner waives any right to introduce such testimony or evidence at the Final 9 Approval Hearing. While the declaration described above is prima facie evidence 10 that the objector is a member of the Class, Plaintiff or Defendant or both may take 11 discovery regarding the matter, subject to Court approval. 12 25. Any Class Member who fails to comply with the applicable provisions 13 of the preceding paragraphs concerning their objection shall waive and forfeit any 14 and all rights he or she may have to object, appear, present witness testimony, 15 and/or submit evidence, shall be barred from appearing, speaking, or introducing 16 any testimony or evidence at the Final Approval Hearing, and shall be bound by all 17 the terms of the Agreement and by all proceedings, orders and judgments in the 18 Litigation. 19 26. All objections must be filed with the Clerk and served on the parties’ 20 counsel no later than the Opt-Out and Objection Deadline. Objections received 21 after the Opt-Out and Objection Deadline will not be considered at the Final 22 Approval Hearing. A Class Member’s failure to submit a written objection within 23 the Opt-Out and Objection Deadline, in conformance with the procedures set forth 24 in the Class Notice, and above, waives any right the Class Member may have to 25 object to the settlement, the Agreement, attorneys’ fees and costs, the Class 26 Representative’s incentive award, or to appeal or seek other review of the Final 27 Judgment and Order. 28

10

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 84

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 97 of 148

1 27. Class Members who do not oppose the settlement, the applications for 2 attorneys’ fees and costs, or Class Representative incentive award need not take 3 any action to indicate their approval. 4 28. Class Members are preliminarily enjoined from filing, commencing, 5 prosecuting, intervening in, participating in, maintaining as class members or 6 otherwise, directly or indirectly through a representative or otherwise, or receiving 7 any benefits from, any lawsuit, arbitration, government action, administrative or 8 regulatory proceeding or order in any jurisdiction, forum or tribunal asserting any 9 Released Claims. In addition, all persons are preliminarily enjoined from filing, 10 commencing or prosecuting a lawsuit as a class action (including by seeking to 11 amend a pending complaint to include class allegations or by seeking class 12 certification in a pending action in any jurisdiction) on behalf of Class Members, 13 or asserting any Released Claims. Nothing herein shall require any Class Member 14 to take any affirmative action with regard to other pending class action litigation in 15 which he or she may be an absent class member. 16 29. The Agreement and the proceedings and statements made pursuant to 17 the Agreement or papers filed relating to the approval of the Agreement, and this 18 Order, are not and shall not in any event be construed as, offered in evidence as, 19 received in evidence as, and/or deemed to be evidence of a presumption, 20 concession, or an admission of any kind by any of the Parties of (i) the truth of any 21 fact alleged or the validity of any claim or defense that has been, could have been, 22 or in the future might be asserted in the Litigation, any other litigation, court of law 23 or equity, proceeding, arbitration, tribunal, investigation, government action, 24 administrative proceeding, or other forum, or (ii) any liability, responsibility, fault, 25 wrongdoing, or otherwise of the Parties. Defendant has denied and continues to 26 deny the claims asserted by Plaintiff. Nothing contained herein shall be construed 27 to prevent a Party from offering the Agreement into evidence for the purposes of 28 enforcement of the Agreement.

11

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 85

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 98 of 148

1 30. The certification of the Class shall be binding only with respect to the 2 settlement of this Litigation. In the event that the Agreement is terminated 3 pursuant to its terms or is not finally approved by the Court, or such approval is 4 reversed, vacated, or modified in any material respect by this or any other Court, 5 the certification of the Class shall be deemed vacated, the Litigation shall proceed 6 as if the Class had never been certified (including Defendant’s right to oppose any 7 subsequent motion for class certification), and no reference to the Class, the 8 Agreement, or any documents, communications, or negotiations related in any way 9 thereto shall be made for any purpose. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 DATED: ______The Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

12

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 86

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 99 of 148

EXHIBIT I

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 87

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 100 of 148

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT A. MASON, on behalf of CASE NO. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC himself, all others similarly situated and CLASS ACTION 12 the general public, Filed: December 21, 2012 13 Plaintiff, FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER: 14 (1) APPROVING CLASS ACTION 15 v. SETTLEMENT, (2) AWARDING CLASS COUNSEL FEES AND 16 HEEL, INC., a New Mexico EXPENSES, (3) AWARDING 17 Corporation, CLASS REPRESENTATIVE INCENTIVE AWARD, 18 Defendant. (4) PERMANENTLY ENJOINING 19 PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS, AND (5) DISMISSING ACTION WITH 20 PREJUDICE 21 Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 22 Date: 23 Time: Dept.: 2D 24 25 26 27 28

Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 88 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 101 of 148

1 PROCEDURAL HISTORY 2 Plaintiff Robert A. Mason in this action, styled Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case 3 No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC (KSC) (S.D. Cal.) (the “Litigation”), filed a Complaint 4 against Defendant Heel, Inc., alleging violations of California’s Unfair 5 Competition Law (“UCL,” Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.), False Advertising 6 Law (“FAL,” id. §§ 17500, et seq.), the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA,” 7 Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq.), breach of express and implied warranties, and 8 violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (“MMWA,” 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, et 9 seq.). Dkt. No. 1. Defendant manufactures, markets and sells in the United States 10 the homeopathic Products at issue in this Settlement. Plaintiff alleges that 11 Defendant’s labeling and marketing of their homeopathic Products is false and 12 misleading. 13 After arms-length settlement discussions, the parties entered into a 14 Settlement Agreement dated ______, 2013 (“Agreement” or “Settlement 15 Agreement”). Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Final 16 Approval of the Settlement Agreement and Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees 17 and Incentive Award for the Class Representative. After consideration of the 18 Parties’ briefs and the briefs submitted by the objectors to the Settlement, the Court 19 hereby GRANTS Final Approval of the Settlement. 20 On ______, 2013, the Court entered its Order (1) 21 Preliminarily Approving Class Action Settlement, (2) Certifying Class, (3) 22 Appointing Class Representative and Lead Class Counsel, (4) Approving 23 Notice Plan, and (5) Setting Final Approval Hearing (“Preliminary Approval 24 Order”), in which it preliminarily approved the Settlement. The Court also scheduled a hearing to determine whether the Settlement is fair, reasonable, 25 adequate, in the best interests of the Class, and free from collusion, such that 26 the Court should grant Final Approval of the Settlement, and to consider 27

28 1 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 89

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 102 of 148

1 Plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorneys’ fees, costs and litigation expenses, 2 and incentive for the Class Representative (“Fairness Hearing”). 3 The Court has considered: 4 . the points and authorities submitted by Plaintiff in support of the motion 5 for final approval of the Settlement (“Final Approval Motion”); . 6 the points and authorities submitted by Plaintiff in support of the motion for an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses, and approval of 7 incentive award for the Class Representative (“Fee Motion”); 8 . Defendant’s memorandum in support of final approval of the Settlement; 9 . the declarations and exhibits submitted in support of said motions; 10 . the Settlement Agreement; 11 . the entire record in this proceeding, including but not limited to the 12 points and authorities, declarations, and exhibits submitted in support of 13 preliminary approval of the Settlement, filed ______, 2013; 14 . the Notice Plan, providing full and fair notice to the Class; 15 . the existence of only ___ objections to and ___ exclusions from the 16 Settlement, and the substance of those objections, if any; 17 . the absence of any objection or response by any official after the 18 provision of all notices required by the Class Action Fairness Act of 19 2005, 28 U.S.C. §1715; 20 . the oral presentations of Class Counsel, Counsel for Defendant, and 21 objector(s) at the Fairness Hearing; 22 . this Court’s experiences and observations while presiding over this 23 matter, and the Court’s file herein; and . 24 the relevant law. Based upon these considerations and the Court’s findings of fact and 25 conclusions of law as set forth in the Preliminary Approval Order and in this 26 Final Judgment and Order (1) Approving Class Action Settlement, (2) 27

28 2 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 90

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 103 of 148

1 Awarding Class Counsel Fees and Expenses, (3) Awarding Class 2 Representative Incentive, (4) Permanently Enjoining Parallel Proceedings, and 3 (5) Dismissing Action with Prejudice (“Final Approval Order”), and good 4 cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED: 5 1. Definitions. The capitalized terms used in this Final Approval 6 Order shall have the meanings and/or definitions given to them in the Settlement Agreement or, if not defined therein, the meanings and/or 7 definitions given to them in this Final Approval Order. 8 2. Incorporation of Documents. This Final Approval Order 9 incorporates the Settlement Agreement, filed as Exhibit A to the Declaration of 10 Ronald A. Marron in support of preliminary settlement approval on 11 ______, 2013, including all exhibits thereto, and the Court’s 12 findings and conclusions contained in its Preliminary Approval Order. 13 3. Jurisdiction. The Court has personal jurisdiction over the Parties, 14 the Class Members, including objectors, and Defendant. The Court has subject 15 matter jurisdiction over this action, including, without limitation, jurisdiction to 16 approve the Settlement, to settle and release all claims alleged in the action and 17 all claims released by the Settlement, including the Released Claims, to 18 adjudicate any objections submitted to the proposed Settlement, and to dismiss 19 this action with prejudice. All Class Members who did not exclude themselves 20 according to the Court’s prior orders and the terms of the Class Notices have 21 consented to the jurisdiction of this Court for purposes of this action and the 22 Settlement of this action. Findings and Conclusions 23 4. Definition of the Class and Class Members. The Court’s Preliminary 24 Approval Order defines the “Class,” which is comprised of the “Class 25 Members,” as follows: 26 All U.S. consumers who purchased the Products listed in Exhibit D 27

28 3 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 91

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 104 of 148

1 to the Agreement, for household or personal use, during the Class 2 Period (as defined by Paragraph 1.7 of the Agreement) are 3 included. Excluded from the Class are: Heel; persons who during 4 or after the Class Period were officers or directors of Heel, or any 5 corporation, trust or other entity in which Heel has a controlling 6 interest; Heel employees; the members of the immediate families of Heel employees or their successors, heirs, assigns and legal 7 representatives; and any judicial officer hearing this Litigation, as 8 well as their immediate family members and employees. 9 The Court affirms its certification of the Class, as set forth in the Preliminary 10 Approval Order. All Class Members are subject to this Final Approval Order 11 and the Final Judgment to be entered by the Clerk of Court in accordance 12 herewith. 13 5. Class Certifications (Rule 23) 14 A. Numerosity 15 Defendant’s sales in the United States number in the hundreds of 16 thousands annually. See Decl. of ______in Supp. of Final 17 Approval ¶ __. For the purposes of this Settlement, no party or objector 18 contests numerosity. The Court finds that the Class is sufficiently numerous 19 that joinder of all class claims is impracticable. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). 20 B. Commonality 21 The Court finds that there are questions of law and fact common to the 22 Class, as to whether Defendants made false or deceptive marketing claims about its Products. All Class Members allege the same injury: loss of money 23 spent purchasing the allegedly deceptive-labeled Products. All Class Members 24 were exposed to the same contested labeling claims regarding the level of 25 dilution in the Products, as represented by an “X” in the ingredients list. 26 Resolution of the common questions about whether Defendant’s labeling 27

28 4 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 92

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 105 of 148

1 claims were deceptive would resolve all of the claims in one stroke. 2 Accordingly, the Court affirms its prior ruling under Rule 23(a)(2). 3 C. Typicality 4 The Court finds that Plaintiff’s claims are reasonably co-extensive with 5 those of the other Class Members so as to meet Rule 23(a)(3)’s requirements; 6 indeed, they are identical. Typicality is a “permissive” standard under which “representative claims are ‘typical’ if they are reasonably co-extensive with 7 those of absent class members; they need not be substantially identical.” 8 Hanlon v. v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011, 1020 (9th Cir. 1998). For the 9 purposes of this Settlement, the parties and objectors do not contend the Class 10 lacks typicality. The Court therefore affirms its prior order, finding that the 11 Plaintiff’s claims are reasonably coextensive with those of the Class. 12 D. Adequacy of Class Representative 13 Having considered the factors set forth in Rule 23(g)(1), the Court finds 14 that Plaintiff and Class Counsel are adequate class representatives. For the 15 purposes of this Settlement, the parties and objectors do not contend the Class 16 lacks adequate representation. Class Counsel has fully and competently 17 prosecuted all causes of action, claims, theories of liability, and remedies 18 reasonably available to the Class Members. The Court hereby affirms its 19 appointment of the Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron as Class Counsel. The 20 Court also affirms its appointment of Robert A. Mason as Class 21 Representative, finding that he possesses no interests adverse to the Class and 22 is adequate to represent the Class. E. Rule 23(b) Has Been Satisfied 23 For the purposes of this Settlement, the Parties contend that the elements 24 of Rule 23(b)(3) have been met. The Court finds that questions of law and fact 25 as to whether a reasonable consumer would find the Products’ packaging 26 deceptive predominate over individual questions. Plaintiff alleges a common 27

28 5 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 93

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 106 of 148

1 injury on behalf of the Class, specifically the loss of the purchase price of the 2 Products, and the Products’ respective packaging was standard across the 3 United States and consistent throughout the Class Period. The Court also finds 4 that resolution on a class-wide basis is superior for purposes of judicial 5 efficiency and to provide a forum for absent Class members, who are unlikely 6 to bring individual suits to recover the sum of $25.00 per Product. The Court therefore affirms its prior ruling that the Class satisfies Rule 23(b)(3). The 7 Court also affirms its prior ruling that the Class satisfies Rule 23(b)(2). The 8 primary relief in this claim was injunctive relief in the form of labeling changes 9 to the Products’ labels, and restitution to the Class was incidental to the 10 equitable relief agreed to by the Parties. 11 6. The Settlement. The Court finds that the Settlement is fair, 12 reasonable, and adequate to the Class, in light of the complexity, expense, and 13 likely duration of the litigation (including appellate proceedings), and the risks 14 involved in establishing liability, damages, and in maintaining the action as a 15 class action, through trial and appeal. See Rodriguez v. West Publ’g Corp., 563 16 F.3d 948, 963 (9th Cir. 2009). The Settlement is the result of arms-length 17 negotiation and there is no evidence of collusion or other conflicts of interest 18 between Plaintiff, Class Counsel and the Class. In re Bluetooth Headset Prods. 19 Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 935, 946 (9th Cir. 2011). 20 A. The Parties reached the proposed Settlement only after 21 proceeding with voluntary investigation and discovery in this action, and 22 following protracted negotiations before a capable and well-respected mediator, the Honorable Judge Leo S. Papas (Ret.) of Judicate West. For a 23 period of over five months, between February 2013 and July 2013, the Parties 24 engaged in extensive negotiations, including joint and individual mediation 25 sessions with Judge Papas, and the Parties’ own follow-up negotiations, in 26 order to reach agreement over the specific terms of the proposed Settlement. 27

28 6 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 94

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 107 of 148

1 Plaintiff and Class Counsel maintain that this action and the claims 2 asserted herein are meritorious and that Plaintiff and the Class would have 3 prevailed at trial. Notwithstanding, Plaintiff and Class Counsel have agreed to 4 settle the action pursuant to the provisions of the Settlement, after considering, 5 among other things: (i) the substantial benefits to Plaintiff and the Class under 6 the terms of the Settlement; (ii) the uncertainty of being able to prevail at trial; (iii) the uncertainty relating to Defendant’s defenses and the expense of 7 additional motion practice in connection therewith; (iv) the issues relating to 8 proving damages on an individual Class Member basis; (v) the attendant risks, 9 difficulties and delays inherent in litigation, especially in complex actions such 10 as this; and (vi) the desirability of consummating this Settlement promptly in 11 order to provide effective relief to Plaintiff and the Class. Plaintiff and Class 12 Counsel agree that the Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate because it 13 provides substantial benefits to the Class, is in the best interests of the Class, 14 and fairly resolves the claims alleged in this action. 15 Defendant expressly denies any wrongdoing alleged in the pleadings in 16 the action, and does not admit or concede any actual or potential fault, 17 wrongdoing, or liability in connection with any facts or claims which have 18 been or could have been alleged against it in the action. Defendant asserts that 19 it sells, manufactures and markets the Products in accordance with well- 20 recognized and widely-accepted homeopathic principles that have been 21 adopted by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). The FDA polices and 22 enforces federal rules and regulations regarding homeopathic drug labels— rules and regulations with which Defendant avow they are in compliance. 23 Defendant nonetheless considers it desirable for the action to be settled and 24 dismissed because the proposed Settlement will: (i) avoid further expense and 25 disruption of the management and operation of Defendant’s businesses due to 26 the pendency and defense of the action; (ii) finally put Plaintiff’s and the Class’ 27

28 7 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 95

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 108 of 148

1 claims and the underlying matters to rest; and (iii) avoid the substantial 2 expense, burdens, and uncertainties associated with a potential finding of 3 liability and damages on the claims alleged in the Complaint. 4 The Parties also fully briefed an extensive motion to dismiss in this 5 action, which included, inter alia, claims and defenses on the issue of the 6 federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. § 301, et seq., “FDCA”), whether it preempted the consumer fraud claims contained in the Litigation, 7 and whether Plaintiff could bring claims that Defendant lacked clinical proof 8 for the Products. Accordingly, the Parties were well-versed in the merits, risks, 9 and likelihood of success, should this action have been litigated through trial. 10 Based upon the stage of litigation reached concerning relevant legal 11 issues and the Parties’ exchange of information through their voluntary 12 discovery process, Plaintiff and Defendant were fully informed of the legal 13 bases for the claims and defenses herein, and capable of balancing the risks of 14 continued litigation and the benefits of the Settlement. Class Counsel and 15 Defendant’s counsel are highly experienced civil litigation lawyers with 16 specialized knowledge in food and drug labeling issues, and complex class 17 action litigation generally. Class Counsel and Defendant’s counsel are capable 18 of properly assessing the risks, expenses, and duration of continued litigation. 19 B. The Settlement provides for fair, reasonable, and adequate 20 cash payments and/or other monetary benefits to every Class Member, with a 21 common fund of $1 million and payments of up to $150 per Class Member that 22 submits proof(s) of purchase for the Products with a Claim Form, and up to $100 per Class Member that does not submit receipts or evidence of purchase 23 (such as packaging), but who signs a Claim Form under penalty of perjury. No 24 portion of the substantial Settlement relief will revert to Defendant. Any 25 excess monies in the Settlement Fund, after payment of all Valid Claims, 26 attorney’s fees and expenses, incentive award, claims administrator fees and 27

28 8 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 96

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 109 of 148

1 expenses, and taxes shall be distributed as follows: (i) 50% as a pro rata 2 supplemental cash payment to all Class Members that submitted a Valid Claim 3 Form, and (ii) 50% as cy pres relief to Consumers Union, a non-profit 4 organization dedicated to enhancing consumer understanding in the realm of 5 drug labeling. 6 The Settlement also affords meaningful injunctive relief. First, in order to address concerns that consumers may not be aware that homeopathic 7 products have not been subject to the same FDA scrutiny as allopathic drugs, 8 Defendant has agreed to provide the following FDA Disclaimer to inform 9 consumers with regard to the Products’ claims of efficacy: “These statements 10 have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.” Settlement 11 Agreement ¶ 4.1.2. 12 Second, to address Plaintiff’s concern that homeopathic labels do not 13 sufficiently explain the concept of a homeopathic dilution, Defendant has 14 agreed to provide a Dilution Disclaimer in close proximity to the Drug Facts 15 panel on each of its labels, which shall state: “’X’ is a homeopathic dilution: 16 see www.[link created pursuant to ¶ 4.1.4 of the Settlement] for details.” Id. ¶ 17 4.1.3. The identified webpage shall provide consumers a more detailed 18 explanation of the dilutions. Id. ¶ 4.1.4. Defendant shall also include a link on 19 all websites that it owns or operates to the FDA web site’s Compliance Policy 20 Guide § 400.400 for homeopathic drugs, in a reasonably accessible location, 21 for consumers wishing more information about homeopathy. Id. ¶ 4.1.4.4. 22 Third, Defendant has agreed that it shall not use the words “Natural,” 23 “All Natural,” “100% Natural,” or similar language on all Products unless it 24 qualifies that language by referring only to those ingredients that are natural. Id. ¶ 4.1.7. 25 Fourth, Defendant shall not use the words “Clinically Proven,” on all 26 Products for which it does not possess two, independent, randomized, double- 27

28 9 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 97

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 110 of 148

1 blind, placebo-controlled human clinical trials. Id. ¶ 4.1.8. 2 Fifth, Defendant shall not use the words “Doctor Recommended,” or 3 similar on all Products unless it qualifies whether any doctors that recommend 4 the Products are homeopathic practitioners or allopathic physicians. 5 The Court has considered the realistic range of outcomes in this matter, 6 including the amount Plaintiff might receive if he prevailed at trial, the strength and weaknesses of the case, the novelty and number of the complex legal 7 issues involved, and the risk that Plaintiff and the Class would receive less than 8 the Settlement relief or take nothing at trial. The relief offered by the 9 Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate in view of these factors. 10 C. The Court has found no evidence of collusion between 11 Plaintiff and Defendant or their respective counsel. The Settlement resulted 12 from extensive arms-length, adversarial negotiation. Up to and through 13 Settlement, both parties have vigorously litigated and negotiated this action.1 14 Further, the Court has evaluated the factors set forth by the Ninth Circuit and 15 determined that there was no collusion. See In re Bluetooth Headset Prods. 16 Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 935, 947 (9th Cir. 2011) (the three factors are: “(1) when 17 counsel receive a disproportionate distribution of the settlement, . . . (2) when 18 the parties negotiate a ‘clear sailing’ arrangement providing for the payment of 19 attorneys' fees separate and apart from class funds, . . . and (3) when the parties 20 1 Class Counsel conducted an extensive examination and evaluation of the 21 relevant facts and law to assess the merits of the named Plaintiff’s and Class 22 claims, to determine how best to serve the interests of Plaintiff and the Class. In the course of this examination, Class Counsel reviewed approximately 23 ______pages of documents produced by Defendants, consisting of 24 marketing data, label and package mechanicals, sales figures, unit sales in California and the rest of the United States, detailed advertising information, 25 scientific studies, and detailed financial information. Class Counsel is also 26 experienced in prosecuting claims alleging deceptive advertising by homeopathic drug manufacturers. Decl. of Ronald A. Marron submitted with Final Approval 27 Motion, ¶ __. 28 10 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 98

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 111 of 148

1 arrange for fees not awarded to revert to defendants . . .”). Class Counsel has 2 requested ___% of the Settlement Fund, well within the range Courts have 3 allowed in the Ninth Circuit. Id. Defendant also retained the right to oppose 4 the Fee Motion to the extent Plaintiff’s Fee Application exceeded five percent 5 over the benchmark common fund percentage in the Ninth Circuit, see Hanlon, 6 150 F. 3d at 1029. Id. No portion of the Settlement Fund reverts to Defendant. Id. The Parties also agreed to the terms of the Settlement before discussing 7 attorneys’ fees, another factor which weighs against a finding of collusion. 8 See, e.g. Weeks v. Kellogg Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155472, at *83 (C.D. 9 Cal. Nov. 23, 2011). 10 D. The response of the Class to this action, the certification of 11 a class, and the Settlement, including Class Counsel’s application for an award 12 of attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and the Class Representative’s incentive, 13 after full, fair, and effective notice thereof, strongly favors final approval of the 14 Settlement. Out of the estimated millions who received Notice, only __ class 15 members submitted valid requests for exclusion. Moreover, only ___ 16 objections were filed, which the Court has considered. 17 7. Notice to the Class. The Class has received the best practicable 18 notice in light of the fact that Defendant does not collect or maintain 19 information sufficient to identify Class Members. The Parties’ selection and 20 retention of SEOmap as the Settlement Administrator was reasonable and 21 appropriate. Based on the Declaration of Gajan Retnasaba of SEOmap, the 22 Court hereby finds that the Settlement Notices were published to the Class 23 Members in the form and manner approved by the Court in its Preliminary Approval Order. The Settlement Notices provided fair, effective and the best 24 practicable notice to the Class of the Settlement and the terms thereof. The 25 Notices also informed the Class of Plaintiff’s intent to seek attorneys’ fees, 26 costs, and incentive payment, and set forth the date, time, and place of the 27

28 11 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 99

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 112 of 148

1 Fairness Hearing and Class Members’ rights to object to the Settlement or Fee 2 Motion and to appear at the Fairness Hearing. The Court further finds that the 3 Settlement afforded Class members a reasonable period of time to exercise 4 such rights. See Weeks v. Kellogg Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155472, at *82 5 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 23, 2011) (class members’ deadline to object or opt out must 6 arise after class counsel’s fee motion is filed); In re Mercury Interactive Corp. Secs. Litig., 618 F.3d 988, 994 (9th Cir. 2010) (same). The Settlement Notices 7 fully satisfied all notice requirements under the law, including the Federal 8 Rules of Civil Procedure, the requirements of the California Legal Remedies 9 Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1781, and all due process rights under the U.S. 10 Constitution and California Constitutions. 11 8. Notices Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1715. The Court finds that 12 Defendant has satisfied all notice requirements of the Class Action Fairness 13 Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1715, as attested to by the Retnasaba 14 Declaration. On ______, 2013, at Defendant’s direction, SEOmap 15 served the notices required by 28 U.S.C. § 1715(b), which included a copy of 16 the Settlement Agreement and other required documents, as well as notice of 17 the date, time, and place of the Fairness Hearing. The Court has received no 18 objection or response to the Settlement agreement by any federal or state 19 official, including any recipient of the foregoing notices. This fact further 20 supports the fairness of the Settlement. 21 9. Implementation of Settlement. The Parties are directed to 22 implement the Settlement according to its terms and conditions. 10. Appeal after Implementation. Any Class Member who failed 23 timely and validly to object to the Settlement has waived any objection. Any 24 Class Member seeking to appeal the Court’s rulings must: (a) move to 25 intervene upon a representation of inadequacy of counsel (if they did not object 26 to the proposed Settlement under the terms of the Settlement); (b) request a 27

28 12 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 100

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 113 of 148

1 stay of implementation of the Settlement; and (c) post an appropriate bond. 2 Absent satisfaction of all three requirements, Defendant is authorized, at its 3 sole option and in its sole discretion, to proceed with the implementation of the 4 Settlement, including before the Effective Date, even if such implementation 5 would moot any appeal. 6 11. Release. The Release set forth in the Settlement Agreement is expressly incorporated herein in all respects, is effective as of the date of the 7 entry of this Final Order, and forever discharges the Released Parties from any 8 claims or liabilities released by the Settlement, including the Released Claims, 9 and including without limitation a waiver of all rights under Section 1542 of 10 the California Civil Code. This Release covers, without limitation, any and all 11 claims for attorneys’ fees and expenses, costs or disbursements incurred by 12 Class Counsel, the Settlement of this Action, the administration of such 13 Settlement, and the Released Claims, except to the extent otherwise specified 14 in this Order and the Settlement Agreement. 15 12. Binding Affect and Permanent Injunction. The Settlement and 16 this Final Order and Judgment shall be forever binding on the Plaintiff and all 17 other Class Members, as well as their heirs, executors and administrators, 18 successors and assigns, and shall have res judicata and other preclusive effect 19 in all pending and future claims, lawsuits or other proceedings maintained by 20 or on behalf of any such persons, to the fullest extent allowed by law. The 21 Court hereby permanently enjoins all Class Members from filing, commencing, 22 prosecuting, intervening in, maintaining, participating (as class members or otherwise) in, or receiving any benefits from, any lawsuit (including putative 23 class action lawsuits), arbitration, administrative or regulatory proceeding or 24 order in any jurisdiction asserting any claims released by this Order; and from 25 organizing Class Members into a separate class to pursue as a purported class 26 action any lawsuit (including by seeking to amend a pending complaint to 27

28 13 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 101

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 114 of 148

1 include class allegations, or seeking class certification in a pending action) 2 asserting any claims released by this Order. Nothing in this paragraph, 3 however, shall require any Class Member to take any affirmative action with 4 regard to other pending class action litigation unrelated to this action in which 5 they may be absent class members. Defendant has reserved the right to file 6 motions or to take other actions to enforce the release provisions of the Settlement Agreement and of this injunction, as they may deem appropriate. 7 The Court finds that issuance of this permanent injunction is necessary and 8 appropriate in the aid of the Court’s jurisdiction over the action and its 9 judgments. 10 13. Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Expenses. 11 The Court orders that Class Counsel is entitled to an award of reasonable 12 attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses incurred in connection with the action 13 and in reaching this Settlement, to be paid at the time and in the manner 14 provided in the Settlement Agreement. The fee award sought in the present 15 case is reasonable when judged by the standards of this circuit. The Ninth 16 Circuit has determined that 25% of the recovery is a “benchmark” award for 17 class action cases, and recognized that percentage fees in the range of 20-30% 18 are generally appropriate. Hanlon, 150 F. 3d at 1029; see also Six Mexican 19 Workers v. Ariz. Citrus Growers, 904 F.2d 1301, 1311 (9th Cir. 1990). A fee 20 award slightly above the benchmark and at the higher end of the accepted 21 range under Hanlon is justified here, based on the excellent results obtained, 22 the experience and skill of Counsel, the complexity of issues, the risk of non- payment and preclusion of other work, the reaction of the Class, and a 23 lodestar/multiplier crosscheck. The fee award requested is also reasonable in 24 light of prior fee awards measured as a percentage of recovery in comparable 25 class action litigation, as set forth in the Fee Motion. 26 The Court finds that the evidence of public interest groups petitioning 27

28 14 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 102

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 115 of 148

1 the Food and Drug Agency to require greater disclosure on over-the-counter 2 homeopathic drug labels – a result that was achieved here without involvement 3 of a government agency or the inherent cost that involves to the public and 4 taxpayers – sufficiently proves the excellent results achieved for this Class of 5 over-the-counter homeopathic drug purchasers. See Marron Decl., Ex. __. 6 Accordingly, modification of the benchmark to a 30% award is reasonable. The Court also finds that an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation 7 expenses is appropriate based on the private attorney general doctrine and 8 Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5, and the Court’s equitable powers under 9 California law. 10 Applying the percentage of the common fund method is appropriate in 11 this case. The common fund is of an amount certain, rendering application of 12 the percentage method appropriate. The Court finds to be reasonable, and 13 awards to Class Counsel, attorneys’ fees in the amount of $______, 14 which represents ____ percent (__%) of the common fund. The Court also 15 finds to be reasonable, and awards to Class Counsel, litigation expenses, to be 16 paid as provided in the Settlement, in the total amount of $______. 17 The reasonableness of the fee awarded by this Final Approval Order is 18 supported by a lodestar cross-check analysis. Considering the applicable 19 factors, the Court finds that applying a fee multiplier of _____, which supports 20 a percentage-of-fund award of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $______, or 21 ____ percent of the fund, would be appropriate. Courts have approved 22 multipliers ranging from 2-4 (and higher) in comparably complex litigation and 23 under such circumstances. See, e.g., Wershba v. Apple Computer, 91 Cal. App. 24 4th 224, 255 (2001); Behrens v. Wometco Enters., Inc., 118 F.R.D. 534, 549 (S.D. Fla. 1988). As reflected in these cases, the requested fee multiplier falls 25 on the low end of the reasonable range, based on typical multipliers approved 26 in comparable litigation. The lodestar/multiplier cross-check supports the 27

28 15 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 103

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 116 of 148

1 ____% award requested, and ordered, in this action. See Ex. __ to Marron 2 Decl., setting forth lodestar breakdown. 3 No Named Plaintiff, or any other Class Member, shall have any 4 obligation to pay Class Counsel any further amounts for attorneys’ fees, costs, 5 or litigation expenses in the Action. As none of the objections was sustained, 6 the Court further finds that no Class Member is entitled to seek or receive any further payment of attorneys’ fees or litigation expenses in connection with the 7 action. The Court finds that the amount awarded to Class Counsel is 8 reasonable pursuant to a lodestar/multiplier cross-check of Class Counsel’s 9 hours spent successfully prosecuting this action, hourly billing rates in this 10 action, and prevailing billing rates for comparable work in this district, as set 11 forth below: 12 The Court finds the following hourly billing rates reasonable in light of 13 the complexity of this litigation, the work performed, Class Counsels’ 14 reputation, experience, competence, and the prevailing billing rates for 15 comparably complex work by comparably-qualified counsel in the relevant 16 market: 17 1. For Ronald A. Marron, $680 per hour; 18 2. For Beatrice Skye Resendes, $425 per hour; 19 3. For Alexis M. Wood, $400 per hour; 20 4. For Erin J. Minelli, $385 per hour; and 21 5. For future attorney time in connection with settlement 22 administration, a blended rate of $350 per hour. 23 The $215 hourly billing rate for work performed by paralegals and law clerks, requested by the Marron Firm, is likewise reasonable. Paralegal time, 24 which is normally billed to fee-paying clients, is properly included and 25 reimbursable under a lodestar analysis. See, e.g., United Steelworkers v. 26 Phelps Dodge Corp., 896 F. 2d 403, 407-408 (9th Cir. 1990). 27

28 16 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 104

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 117 of 148

1 The time declared to have been expended by Class Counsel is reasonable 2 in amount in view of the complexity and subject matter of this litigation, the 3 skill and diligence with which it has been prosecuted and defended, and the 4 quality of the result obtained for the Class. 5 Based on the declaration of Class Counsel submitted in support of the 6 Fee Motion, the Court finds that Class Counsel have incurred out-of-pocket litigation expenses (paid and un-reimbursed, or currently due) in the amount of 7 $______, that said expenses were of a nature typically billed to fee-paying 8 clients, and that said expenses are recoverable or were reasonable and 9 necessary to the prosecution of this action in light of the extent of proceedings 10 both on and off the Court’s docket, the complexity of the legal and factual 11 issues in the case, the amount at stake in this litigation, and the vigorous efforts 12 of counsel for all Parties herein. The Court finds these expenses are reasonable 13 in this case, and shall be paid from the Settlement Fund in the time and manner 14 provided in the Settlement Agreement. 15 14. Class Representative’s Incentive. The named Plaintiff in this 16 action, which the Court appointed Class Representative in its Preliminary 17 Approval Order, has actively participated in and assisted Class Counsel with 18 this litigation for the substantial benefit of the Class despite facing significant 19 personal limitations. Mr. Mason waived his right to pursue potential individual 20 claims or relief in the Action. Apart from the requested incentive, Mr. Mason 21 will receive no settlement payments or benefits of any nature, other than his 22 share of the Settlement relief available to the Class generally. The Court 23 hereby approves an incentive award for Mr. Mason, to be paid at the time and 24 in the manner provided in the Settlement Agreement. The amount of the incentive award shall be $3,500 for Mr. Mason, as Class Representative. Mr. 25 Mason was actively involved throughout the Litigation and contributed 26 significant time and expense in seeing this action to fruition. The Court 27

28 17 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 105

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 118 of 148

1 approves this incentive payment to compensate the Class Representative for the 2 burdens of his active involvement in the Litigation and his commitment and 3 effort on behalf of the Class. 4 15. Class Member Objections. Having considered the ____ written 5 objections, oral argument at the Fairness Hearing, the Parties’ written and oral 6 response to these objections, and the documents and record on file in this Action, the Court overrules all objections. 7 The Court finds no evidence of collusion. Likewise, the Objectors have 8 raised no valid concerns regarding the adequacy of the relief the Settlement 9 provides. The Court has found that the proposed Settlement Agreement 10 provides fair and adequate monetary and injunctive relief. The $1,000,000 11 Settlement Fund is adequate, taking into account the weaknesses in Plaintiff’s 12 case along with the strengths of Defendant’s defenses and the obstacles to 13 class-wide recovery. Further, Defendant’s agreement to modify the Products’ 14 label and packaging, website, and marketing in five significant ways, all of 15 which adequately address the very claims raised in Plaintiff’s Complaint, 16 provides value to the Class. 17 The Court has found that the Notice was fair, reasonable, and adequate, 18 and provided the best practicable notice to the class in compliance with all 19 applicable laws. The fact that the chosen Administrator could effectuate notice 20 in a manner widely approved for classes such as this one, where names of 21 individual class members are unknown, for a cost less than other more 22 expensive administrators, is a benefit to the Class, and not objectionable. The Notice in this case also included statutory newspaper publication within the 23 State of California pursuant to California Civil Code § 1781. 24 The Court also considered objections concerning the Fee Motion. The 25 objections are refuted by the foregoing percentage of recovery analysis, and the 26 exceptional results achieved on behalf of the Class. The Court therefore 27

28 18 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 106

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 119 of 148

1 overrules the objections as to the Fee Motion. 2 16. Modification of Settlement Agreement. The Parties are hereby 3 authorized, without needing further approval from the Court, to agree to and 4 adopt such amendments to, and modifications and expansions of, the 5 Settlement Agreement, if such changes are consistent with this Order and do 6 not limit the rights of any person or Class Member entitled to relief under this Agreement. 7 17. Enforcement of Settlement. Nothing in this Final Order shall 8 preclude any action to enforce or interpret the terms of the Settlement. Any 9 action to enforce or interpret the terms of the Settlement shall be brought solely 10 in this Court. 11 18. Retention of Jurisdiction. The Court expressly retains 12 continuing jurisdiction as to all matters relating to the Settlement, and this 13 Final Order, and for any other necessary and appropriate purpose. Without 14 limiting the foregoing, the Court retains continuing jurisdiction over all aspects 15 of this case including but not limited to any modification, interpretation, 16 administration, implementation, effectuation, and enforcement of the 17 Settlement, the administration of the Settlement and Settlement relief, 18 including notices, payments, and benefits thereunder, the Settlement Notice 19 and sufficiency thereof, any objection to the Settlement, any request for 20 exclusion from the certified Class, the adequacy of representation by Class 21 Counsel and/or the Class Representative, the amount of attorneys’ fees and 22 litigation expenses to be awarded Class Counsel, the amount of any incentives to be paid to the Class Representative, any claim by any person or entity 23 relating to the representation of the Class by Class Counsel, to enforce the 24 release and injunction provisions of the Settlement and of this Order, any 25 remand after appeal or denial of any appellate challenge, any collateral 26 challenge made regarding any matter related to this litigation or this Settlement 27

28 19 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 107

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 120 of 148

1 or the conduct of any party or counsel relating to this litigation or this 2 Settlement, and all other issues related to this action and Settlement. Further, 3 the Court retains continuing jurisdiction to enter any other necessary or 4 appropriate orders to protect and effectuate the Court’s retention of continuing 5 jurisdiction provided that nothing in this paragraph is intended to restrict the 6 ability of the Parties to exercise their rights under the Settlement Agreement. 19. No Admissions. This Final Order and Judgment and the 7 Settlement, all provisions herein or therein, all other documents referred to 8 herein or therein, any actions taken to carry out this Final Order and Judgment 9 and the Settlement, and any negotiations, statements, or proceedings relating to 10 them in any shall not be construed as, offered as, received as, used as, or 11 deemed to be evidence of any kind, including in this Action, any other action, 12 or in any other judicial, administrative, regulatory, or other proceeding, except 13 for purposes of obtaining approval of the Settlement and the entry of judgment 14 in the Action, enforcement or implementation of the Settlement, or to support 15 any defense by Defendant based on principles of res judicata, collateral 16 estoppel, release, waiver, good-faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction, full 17 faith and credit, setoff, or any other theory of claim preclusion, issue 18 preclusion, release, injunction, or similar defense or counterclaim to the extent 19 allowed by law. Neither the Settlement Agreement nor any related 20 negotiations, statements, mediation positions, notes, drafts, outlines, 21 memoranda of understanding, or Court filings or proceedings relating to the 22 Settlement or Settlement approval, shall be construed as, offered as, received as, used as, or deemed to be evidence or an admission or concession by any 23 person, including but not limited to, of any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever 24 on the part of Defendant or as a waiver by Defendant of any applicable 25 defense, including without limitation any applicable statute of limitation. 26 20. Dismissal of Action. This action, including all individual and 27

28 20 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 108

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 121 of 148

1 Class claims resolved in it, shall be dismissed on the merits and with prejudice, 2 without an award of attorneys’ fees or costs to any party except as provided in 3 this Order. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 DATED: ______6 The Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

28 21 Mason v. Heel, Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

EXHIBIT 1 PAGE 109

Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 122 of 148

EXHIBIT 2 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 123 of 148

EXHIBIT 2 PAGE 110 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 124 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 125 of 148 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 126 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 111 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 127 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 112 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 128 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 113 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 129 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 114 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 130 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 115 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 131 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 116 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 132 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 117 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 133 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 118 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 134 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 119 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 135 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 120 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 136 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 121 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 137 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 122 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 138 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 123 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 139 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 124 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 140 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 125 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 141 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 126 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 142 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 127 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 143 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 128 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 144 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 129 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 145 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 130 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 146 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 131 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 147 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 132 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-2 Filed 08/14/13 Page 148 of 148

EXHIBIT 3 PAGE 133 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-3 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 3 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-3 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 3 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-3 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 3 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-4 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-4 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 2

FILED UNDER SEAL Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-5 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 3

LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC 1 RONALD A. MARRON (SBN 175650) ron(a),consumersadvocates. com 2 SKYE RESENDES (SBN 278511) [email protected] 3 ALEXIS WOOD (SBN 270200) 4 [email protected] 651 Arroyo Drive 5 San Diego, California 92103 Telephone:(619) 696-9006 6 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 7 Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1o ROBERT A. MASON, on behalf of Case No. 3: 12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC himself, all others similarly situated and 11 the general public, CLASS ACTION 12 Plaintiff, v. PROOF OF SERVICE 13 HEEL, Inc., a New Mexico Corporation 14 Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Mason v. Heel, Inc. PROOF OF SERVICE Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-5 Filed 08/14/13 Page 2 of 3

1 I am employed in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over 2 the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action. My business address 3 is 651 Arroyo Drive, San Diego, CA 92103. On August 14, 2013, I served the 4 following document(s): 5 1. NOTICE OF JOINT MOTION AND JOINT MOTION FOR AN 6 ORDER (1) GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS 7 ACTION SETTLEMENT, (2) CERTIFYING SETTLEMENT CLASS, 8 (3) APPOINTING CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND LEAD CLASS 9 COUNSEL, (4) APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, AND (5) SETTING 10 FINAL APPROVAL HEARING 11 2. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT 12 OF JOINT MOTION FOR AN ORDER (1) GRANTING 13 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, 14 (2) CERTIFYING SETTLEMENT CLASS, (3) APPOINTING CLASS 15 REPRESENTATIVE AND LEAD CLASS COUNSEL, (4) 16 APPROVING NOTICE PLAN, AND (5) SETTING FINAL 17 APPROVAL HEARING 18 3. DECLARATION OF RONALD A. MARRON (REDACTED) 19 4. DECLARATION OF MATTHEW G. BALL 20 5. DECLARATION OF CHRISTIAN GRIMM (REDACTED) 21 [XX] By Electronic Filing and Service Pursuant to General Order 550: I 22 caused the aforementioned document(s) to be electronically filed on the Court's 23 Electronic Filing System which constitutes service, pursuant to General Order 550 24 of the above-titled Court, upon lead counsel on service list. I also caused the 25 document(s) to be served by Notice of Electronic Filing, which is a notice 26 automatically generated by the CM/ECF system at the time these document( s) 2 7 28 2 Mason v. Heel, Inc. PROOF OF SERVICE Case 3:12-cv-03056-GPC-KSC Document 26-5 Filed 08/14/13 Page 3 of 3

1 were filed with the Court, to lead counsel listed by CM/ECF as "ATTORNEY TO 2 BE NOTICED." 3 Furthermore, I served the following document(s): 4 (PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR 5 PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, 6 CERTIFYING SETTLEMENT CLASS, APPOINTING CLASS 7 REPRESENTATIVE AND LEAD CLASS COUNSEL, APPROVING 8 NOTICE PLAN, AND SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HEARING 9 [ X ] By E-mail: I served the above-entitled document(s) by e-mail on the 10 following interested parties in this action. 11 Matthew G. Ball, Esq. 12 Megan Cesare 13 K&L Gates LLP Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 14 San Francisco, CA 94111 15 Phone: +1.415.249.1014 Fax:+ 1.415.882.8220 16 matthew. [email protected] 17 megan. [email protected] 18 Attorneys for Defendants 19 20 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of 21 America that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court, at 22 whose direction the service was made, and that the foregoing is true and correct. 23 Executed on this 14th day of August 2013, in San Diego County, 24 California. 25 26 27 [email protected] 28 3 Mason v. Heel, Inc. PROOF OF SERVICE