CSPI Alleges PepsiCo’s Naked Juices Mislead Consumers
Representing a group of three consumers, the Center for Science in the
Public Interest (CSPI) has filed a lawsuit against PepsiCo, Inc. alleging
the company’s Naked line misleads consumers by naming and labeling
its juices with foods “perceived by consumers to be highly nutritious, like
kale,” but manufacturing the products without “the ingredient profile
represented.” Lipkind v. PepsiCo, Inc., No. 16-5506 (E.D.N.Y., filed
October 4, 2016).
“Consumers are paying higher prices for the healthful and expensive
ingredients advertised on Naked labels, such as berries, cherries, kale
and other greens, and mango,” said CSPI Litigation Director Maia Kats
in an October 4, 2016, press release. “But consumers are predominantly
getting apple juice, or in the case of Kale Blazer, orange and apple juice.
They’re not getting what they paid for.”
The complaint asserts Naked products “predominantly consist of cheaper
and less nutritious ingredients like apple juice” and targets the label’s
“no sugar added” claim, arguing that consumers mistakenly perceive the
phrase “to mean that the drinks are low in sugar—consisting primarily of low-sugar vegetables and super ingredients heavily emphasized in
juiced form.” The plaintiffs identify Naked’s Kale Blazer beverage as
allegedly representative of the overall marketing strategy for Naked:
although the product is “predominantly orange juice,” the label features
“pictures of kale and other ‘dark leafy’ greens” while “[o]range juice
and apple juice—of which the product largely consists—are not named
or pictured anywhere on the front label.” PepsiCo also uses the Twitter
handle “TweetsByKale” to promote the beverage and “authors promotional
articles on sites like BuzzFeed, wherein PepsiCo extolls the various
benefits of kale and exaggerates its presence in the drink.”
For alleged violations of New York and California consumer-protection
statutes, the plaintiffs seek class certification, an injunction, statutory
and punitive damages and attorney’s fees.
Issue 619
