The main NOW supplements lawsuit currently active is a proposed class action in federal court in Illinois claiming that NOW Health Group’s Magnesium Citrate Softgels cannot deliver the 400 mg of elemental magnesium the label promises. That case survived a motion to dismiss in March 2026 and is now moving into discovery. NOW has also resolved three other consumer-facing legal matters over the past decade: a California Proposition 65 action over lead and cadmium in dozens of products, a data breach class action affecting employees and their dependents, and a slack-fill packaging suit that was dropped almost as soon as it was filed.
The Magnesium Citrate Softgel Class Action
The case is Stonehart and Kouyate v. NOW Health Group, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-04436, filed May 30, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs bought NOW’s Magnesium Citrate Softgels expecting 400 mg of elemental magnesium in a three-capsule serving, drawn from a blend of magnesium citrate, magnesium glycinate, and magnesium malate. According to the complaint, that number is chemically impossible with those three forms in that number of softgels, because each is a low-percentage source of elemental magnesium.1Truth in Advertising. Stonehart v. Now Health Group, Class Action Complaint
The suit alleges one of two things must be true: either the softgels contain far less magnesium than the label states, or NOW is quietly using magnesium oxide, a cheaper and less bioavailable form, without disclosing it. The plaintiffs bring claims under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Utah Consumer Sales Practices Act, and New York consumer protection statutes, along with express and implied warranty theories. They are seeking refunds, disgorgement of profits, an injunction against the labeling, and punitive damages. The proposed class covers U.S. purchasers over the four years before filing, with separate sub-classes for New York and Utah buyers.2Lemberg Law. Stonehart v. Now Health Group
Where the Case Stands
On March 9, 2026, Judge Jeffrey I. Cummings denied NOW’s motion to dismiss the remaining claims. Fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment, violations of New York General Business Law, and breach of warranty under New York and Utah law all survived.3Vital Law / CCH. Stonehart v. Now Health Group, Memorandum Opinion and Order
Judge Cummings found the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged that NOW knew the actual composition of the product and had a duty to disclose it, especially given partial or ambiguous statements on the label. He also noted that NOW’s updated labels, which now list magnesium oxide among the ingredients, may still be inaccurate, so the request for injunctive relief was not moot. The court lifted its stay on discovery. No class has been certified yet, and no settlement has been announced.3Vital Law / CCH. Stonehart v. Now Health Group, Memorandum Opinion and Order
If you bought these softgels in the last several years, keep your receipts or Amazon order records. There is no claim form yet.
Proposition 65 Settlement Over Lead and Cadmium
In 2018, the Environmental Research Center filed a Proposition 65 enforcement action against NOW in Alameda County Superior Court. The notices of violation, dated January and July 2018, identified 44 NOW products, among them protein powders, alfalfa powder, and fiber supplements, that allegedly exceeded California’s maximum allowable dose levels for lead and cadmium without carrying the required warnings.4California Attorney General. Environmental Research Center v. Now Health Group, Complaint
The case settled in December 2018, and a consent judgment was entered in March 2019. NOW paid $260,000 total: roughly $91,500 in civil penalties, about $99,900 in attorney fees and costs, and approximately $68,600 in additional settlement payments. Going forward, any covered product NOW sells in California must either be reformulated to reduce heavy metal content or carry a Proposition 65 warning about lead and cadmium exposure.5California Attorney General. Proposition 65 Settlement, Environmental Research Center v. Now Health Group
This was a labeling and warning case under a California statute. It did not include recalls or consumer refunds, so there is nothing for individual buyers to claim.
The 2023 Data Breach Settlement
A separate class action, Green, et al. v. NOW Health Group, Inc. (No. 2023LA000116), addressed a 2023 cyberattack that exposed personal and health information belonging to current and former NOW employees and their dependents. This case did not involve customers or supplement purchasers. It resolved with a $300,000 settlement fund.6Claim Depot. NOW Health Data Settlement
Eligible class members could claim up to two years of credit monitoring with $1 million in fraud insurance, up to $100 for lost time (four hours at $25 per hour), up to $650 for documented out-of-pocket expenses, and up to $5,500 for documented identity theft or fraud losses. NOW separately agreed to pay up to $190,000 in attorney fees and $6,000 in service awards. The claims deadline was June 4, 2025, and final approval was scheduled for June 25, 2025.6Claim Depot. NOW Health Data Settlement The claims window has closed.
The Dismissed Vitamin C Packaging Lawsuit
In January 2015, Collazo et al. v. Now Health Group, Inc. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (No. 15-cv-328), alleging NOW’s Vitamin C supplement used misleading slack-fill packaging that made containers look fuller than they were. The case ended almost immediately. The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed it with prejudice in April 2015, before NOW filed a response. The reasons for the dismissal were not disclosed on the docket.7Truth in Advertising. Packaging NOW Vitamin C Supplements
One FDA Warning Letter, in 2004
The only publicly documented FDA enforcement action against NOW is an October 2004 warning letter about possible quintozene contamination in one lot of American Ginseng. NOW had already recalled all lots of the product in August 2004, and afterward moved to more sensitive in-house testing, new ginseng suppliers, and stricter fungicide-free specifications.8SupplySide. NOW Responds to FDA Warning Letter No FDA enforcement action has been publicly tied to the magnesium citrate labeling now at issue in the Illinois class action.
What to Do If You Bought a NOW Product
For the magnesium citrate softgels, the class action is active but no class has been certified and no settlement has been reached. If you purchased the product, save your proof of purchase and watch for a certification ruling or settlement notice in Stonehart v. NOW Health Group. For the data breach, the claims deadline has passed. For the Proposition 65 matter, there is no consumer claims process; the remedy was warnings and reformulation on California-sold products. If you have a specific quality concern about a NOW product you purchased, complaints about dietary supplement labeling and safety can be reported to the FDA, though the agency has said it does not take enforcement action based on third-party test results alone and relies on its own regulatory sampling.9SupplySide. FDA Addresses NOW Foods Testing Program, Reorganization’s Effect on ODSP