Last month, the Third Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in
Cottrell v. Alcon Labs.,1 reversing a district
court's dismissal of a class action lawsuit on standing
grounds. The putative class in Cottrell is comprised of
consumers of prescription eye droplet medication used to treat
glaucoma. In their complaint, the named plaintiffs allege that the
manufacturers and distributors of the droplets engaged in unfair
trade practices—as prohibited by state consumer protection
statutes—by selling them in dispensers that discharge the
medicine in doses that are too large (i.e., the
bottle's dropper squirts out 15mL when an average consumer
allegedly only requires 7mL).
In its decision below, the district court granted the
defendants' motion to dismiss on the grounds that the named
plaintiffs lacked Article III standing, reasoning that the
plaintiffs' theory of injury rested on speculation about
hypothetical alternatives and generalized disagreements about
dispenser design.2 However