Sued Once for Baseless Pain-Relief Claims, the Shoe Company Was Sued Again

Gravity Defyer markets footwear designed, according to its advertising, to relieve pain in the knees, back, and joints. The company and its owner had already agreed to a Federal Trade Commission order years earlier requiring evidence-backed claims about the shoes' pain-relief benefits. According to a 2022 complaint, they made the same kind of unsupported claims again anyway, this time in violation of that existing order.DOCUMENTED

The FTC sued Gravity Defyer and its owner in June 2022 for violating the prior order, and in February 2025 secured a federal court order barring the company and its owner from making unsupported pain-relief claims to market the company's footwear.DOCUMENTED

What the complaint alleges

The FTC's 2022 complaint alleged that Gravity Defyer and its owner violated an existing FTC order by continuing to make claims that the company's footwear could relieve pain in the knees, back, and joints without possessing the kind of competent and reliable scientific evidence such health-related claims require.DOCUMENTED Unlike a first-time advertising substantiation case, this complaint centered specifically on the fact that the company had already agreed, under a prior binding order, to stop making exactly this category of unsupported claim — making the alleged conduct a violation of an existing legal obligation rather than a newly identified deceptive practice.DOCUMENTED

Why footwear pain-relief claims require scientific substantiation

Claims that a specific product can relieve pain in joints, knees, or the back are health claims subject to the FTC's general advertising-substantiation requirement, meaning a company must possess competent and reliable scientific evidence supporting the specific claim before making it, regardless of how plausible the underlying biomechanical theory might sound to an ordinary consumer.REVIEWED Footwear marketed around orthopedic or pain-relief benefits occupies a category the FTC has scrutinized repeatedly over the years, since consumers experiencing genuine, often chronic pain represent a receptive audience for products promising relief, whether or not the underlying scientific support for a specific shoe design actually exists.

Why order violations carry heightened consequences

A company already bound by a prior FTC order faces a fundamentally different legal posture than a first-time offender: the underlying conduct standard has already been established and agreed to, meaning the question in a follow-up enforcement action is not whether the conduct was unlawful in the abstract, but whether the company complied with terms it had already accepted.REVIEWED That narrower legal question typically makes order-violation cases more straightforward to prove and can support civil penalties that a first-time violation, litigated as an ordinary Section 5 deception claim, would not carry in the same way.

Terms of the 2025 court order

The federal court order secured in February 2025 bars Gravity Defyer and its owner from making unsupported pain-relief claims to market the company's footwear going forward.DOCUMENTED The order's issuance nearly three years after the 2022 complaint reflects the extended litigation timeline that can accompany order-violation cases when a defendant contests the allegations rather than settling promptly, as opposed to the faster resolution typical of negotiated first-time settlements.REVIEWED

The company had already agreed once, under a binding federal order, to stop making unsupported pain-relief claims about its shoes — and the FTC alleges it made them again anyway.

Why the case matters

For consumers considering footwear marketed around specific pain-relief or orthopedic claims, the Gravity Defyer case is a reminder that this specific product category has drawn repeated FTC scrutiny, and that a company's continued marketing of unsupported health claims even after previously agreeing to stop signals a pattern regulators have found difficult to correct through settlement alone — sometimes requiring a second round of federal court enforcement to actually change the underlying advertising practice.

Why a prior order made this case easier to bring

Because Gravity Defyer had already agreed to a binding order addressing its pain-relief marketing claims, the FTC's 2022 complaint did not need to independently establish from scratch that the underlying claims were unsubstantiated — that standard had already been agreed to by the company itself in the earlier proceeding. The narrower legal question of whether the company complied with terms it had already accepted is generally more straightforward for the agency to prove than litigating the underlying deception allegation as an entirely new matter.

What repeat violations signal to regulators

A company that returns to substantially similar marketing claims after already settling a case addressing that exact category of claim signals, to regulators evaluating future remedies, that a negotiated settlement alone may not be sufficient to change the underlying business practice. That pattern is part of why the FTC pursued a fresh federal court order rather than simply negotiating a second settlement, seeking a more directly enforceable judicial remedy given the company's demonstrated history of returning to the same conduct. Consumers who purchased footwear based on specific pain-relief claims can reasonably ask a company directly what clinical evidence exists for that exact product line, rather than assuming a plausible-sounding design feature is itself proof of the advertised benefit. A company unwilling to share that evidence directly, particularly one already under a prior order addressing the same category of claim, is signaling something worth taking seriously before any purchase. Consumers can also check the FTC's own case archive to see whether a company has a documented history of similar unresolved allegations before making a purchase. That kind of background check takes only a few minutes and can reveal a pattern of unresolved allegations well before any purchase decision is made.

Have documents relevant to this story? Reach us through our tips channel.