Here is some information that I found someone said about the case. I’m not sure if it is true or not.

Quote:
“Not to defend Scent Lok, I don't use their product, and I really don't know much about them as a company this post is the first time I ever looked at this, I thought I would point a couple things out. First the request to enjoin a class action lawsuit was denied in August. That actually helps Scent Lok in a couple ways. First, each plantiff will have to bring a seperate action with a different and unique set of case facts and request for damages. Each plantiff will seperately have to prove not only that the product was defective, was sold knowingly defective with intent to deceive, and that each plantiff had specific damages related specifically to their product.
Assuming that all these things could be proven the question becomes; what are the damages in the case. There are really two calculations, actual damages and puntative damages. Actual would be based on the cost of the Scent Lok product. Respondents counter would be that the cost of a scent lok product is relatively the same as another hunting garment and the plantiff did receive a usable hunting garmet. It would be up to a judge to decide the equity of that arguement but it ultimately will only be for a fairly small amount of money. The question becomes whether there is a substantial chance of receiving punatative damages. In that case the judge, (possibly jury) would decide if there was substantial enough evidence that the company operated in bad faith and wanted to punish them by awarding money. The risk that you have to take is whether your case, as a plaintiff, is strong enough that you will be awarded enough punative damages to cover your legal fees. Sometimes legal fees are awarded but it is never a sure bet and a plantiff is just as likely to lose and have to pay Scent Lok.
Second, on the topic of marketing claims, especially advertising slogans, it is really buyer beware.” Viator 12-2-09