A consumer has filed a proposed class action against Vigo Importing Co. alleging its octopus product is actually jumbo squid, “which is significantly cheaper and of a lower quality than octopus.” Fonseca v. Vigo Importing Co., No. 16-2055 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., filed April 19, 2016). The complaint details each animal’s taxonomy within the animal kingdom and describes the current populations of each—octopus populations “have dwindled around the world due to over-fishing,” while “jumbo squid populations have been thriving” because of the squid’s “ability to adapt to changing ocean conditions caused by global warming.” As a result, “the cost of octopus has risen dramatically compared to the cost of squid,” and “due to similarities in texture, squid can easily be substituted for octopus without the consumer being able to tell the difference particularly when sold in a sauce like garlic sauce or marinara sauce.” The plaintiff argues that independent…
Category Archives Issue 602
Two consumers have filed a putative class action against Panera LLC involving the restaurant chain’s “2.0” ordering system using touchscreen kiosks and a “fast lane” pick-up shelf, which they allege fails to accommodate the visually impaired. Gomez v. Panera LLC, No. 16-21421 (S.D. Fla., filed April 20, 2016). The plaintiffs argue that they each visited a Florida location of Panera and found themselves “unable to enjoy the same ordering and dining experience as sighted patrons” because they were “denied the ability to independently select and purchase lunch.” The kiosks “were not designed and programmed to interface with commercially available screen reader software and further were not equipped with auxiliary aids (such as an audio interface system) for disabled individuals who are visually impaired,” the complaint alleges. The plaintiffs further argue that Panera’s website is unusable to them because it does not integrate with their screen reader programs. They seek orders…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Campbell Soup Co. alleging the company misrepresents its Healthy Request gumbo soup as “healthy” despite containing trans fat. Brower v. Campbell Soup Co., No. 16-1005 (S.D. Cal., filed April 25, 2016). Campbell has branded itself as “one of the world’s leading providers of healthy and nutritious foods,” the complaint asserts, in part by establishing a research group, Campbell’s Center for Nutrition & Wellness, and obtaining “heart-check” certification from the American Heart Association (AHA) for some of its products. Despite its marketing, Campbell adds “partially hydrogenated soybean oil, containing artificial trans fat, to Healthy Request Gumbo,” the plaintiff argues. The complaint details health risks reportedly linked to the consumption of trans fat, including increased risks of cardiovascular ailments, type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer’s disease. The “statements, images, and emblems” appearing on Healthy Request Gumbo’s label—the “Healthy Request” branding, “heart healthy” claim, vignettes of…
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has filed lawsuits against The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. and The Honest Co., Inc. alleging the companies’ “organic” infant formula products contain multiple substances prohibited for use in organic food by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Organic Consumers Assoc. v. Hain Celestial Grp., Inc., No. 16-2533 (D.C. Super. Ct., filed April 5, 2016); Organic Consumers Assoc. v. Honest Co., Inc., No. SC125655 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed April 6, 2016). The lawsuit against Hain Celestial challenges the label claims of its Earth’s Best products, which the complaint argues are all labeled organic despite none meeting federal organic regulations. “Behind the picturesque red barn of the Earth’s Best logo displayed on each of the Falsely Labeled Products lies a chemical soup of synthetic, toxic, and hazardous ingredients,” the complaint argues. “For example, of the 48 ingredients in Earth’s Best Organic Infant Formula, more than…
A California federal court has dismissed a lawsuit alleging Kraft Heinz Food Co. mislabels its Heinz sauces as manufactured in the United States despite containing ingredients sourced outside the country, including turmeric, tamarind extract and jalapenos. Alaei v. Kraft Heinz Food Co., No 15-2961 (S.D. Cal., order entered April 22). The complaint failed to meet the heightened pleading standards associated with fraud claims, the court found, in part because she did not allege that the Heinz 57® sauce she bought contained any specific ingredients of foreign origin. Further, she could not have standing to assert misrepresentation claims against products she did not purchase without arguing the other sauces were substantially similar to Heinz 57®. Accordingly, the court granted Kraft’s motion to dismiss but allowed the plaintiff leave to amend. Additional information on the complaint appears in Issue 589 of this Update. Issue 602
A New York federal court has rejected Chobani, LLC’s motion for reconsideration of a preliminary injunction preventing the company from claiming in its advertising that competitor Dannon Co.’s yogurt products contain chlorine and are thereby unhealthy, unsafe and inferior to Chobani yogurt. Chobani, LLC v. Dannon Co., Inc., No. 16-0030 (N.D.N.Y., order entered April 22, 2016). Chobani’s marketing campaign displayed an image of a swimming pool—which is cleaned with calcium hypochlorite, a substance colloquially referred to as “chlorine”—while asserting that Dannon Light & Fit® yogurt contained chlorine, one of four chemical elements that constitute sweetener sucralose. Additional details about the complaint appear in Issue 590 of this Update. According to the court, Chobani argued that the “limitations place it at a competitive disadvantage because it completely precludes usage of the phrase ‘no bad stuff’ in relation to Dannon products regardless of whether or not a safety message is at issue.…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety is convening a June 10, 2016, public meeting in Washington, D.C. to discuss U.S. draft positions for consideration at the 39th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) in Rome, Italy, on June 27-July 1. Agenda activities at the June 10 meeting will include Codex work on antimicrobial resistance, relations between CAC and other international organizations and issues regarding food integrity/authenticity. See Federal Register, April 25, 2016. Issue 602
