Federal Judge Denies Class Certification in Frozen Waffle Litigation

A federal court in California has denied the request for class certification filed by plaintiffs who allege that Van’s International Foods falsely advertised its frozen waffle products by listing incorrect nutritional information in their labels. Hodes v. Van’s Int’l Foods, No. 09-1530 (C.D. Cal, decided July 23, 2009). While the court found that the claims met the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation requirements of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it found that the named plaintiffs failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3). According to the court, common questions of law and fact do not predominate over individualized issues, and the class action device is not superior to other methods for adjudicating the controversy.

The named plaintiffs had sought to certify a nationwide class of consumers, and the court was concerned about the manageability of the class action, stating, “the Court has concerns about how Plaintiffs will identify each class member and prove which brand of Van’s frozen waffles each member purchased, in what quantity, and for what purpose. The likelihood that tens of thousands of class members saved their receipts as proof of their purchase of Van’s waffles is very low.”

The court also observed that the plaintiffs had not “presented the Court with any indication of how to determine the amount of damages suffered by each class member. The Court will not engage in its own investigation as to which of Van’s 19 frozen waffle varieties class members purchased, how much each class member spent, and whether those particular varieties contained nutritional inaccuracies.” Additional details about the litigation appear in issues 295 and 308 of this Update.