American Law Reports (A.L.R.) has published an annotation titled “Liability of Food Manufacturer Based on Statement in Product Labeling or Promotion Relating to, or Inconsistent with Presence of, Trans Fat in Product.” 92 A.L.R.6th 141 (2014). It “collects and analyzes all the federal and state cases discussing the liability, when not precluded by federal preemption, of a food manufacturer based on an allegedly untrue or misleading statement, in the labeling or promotion of a food product, relating to the presence or absence of trans fat in the product or a statement that, while not referring itself to trans fat, is allegedly inconsistent with the presence of trans fat in the product.” Most of the nearly 30 cases were filed in federal district courts in the Ninth Circuit. Issue 517
Category Archives 9th Circuit
A federal court in California has determined that the tasks an employee performed only when working the closing shift for Starbucks Corp. consumed a de minimis amount of time and thus dismissed his claims that the company violated the state Labor Code by failing to pay him for that time. Troester v. Starbucks Corp., No. 12-7677 (C.D. Cal., order entered March 7, 2014). According to the court, the software Starbucks used during the relevant time period required an employee to clock out before initiating the store closing procedure, which involved setting the store alarm and locking the door, tasks that took no more than one to two minutes. Other tasks the employee undertook included walking employees to their cars or staying with them until they were picked up, placing forgotten patio furniture indoors, or even re-entering the store to retrieve an employee’s personal belongings. In the court’s view, “[e]ven assuming all…
A California resident has filed a putative statewide class action against PepsiCo, Inc., alleging that the company “touts Pepsi One as follows—‘Full Flavor and One Calorie are now living in complete harmony inside Pepsi One—the drink that unites the taste of regular cola with all the things you like about diet cola’"—without disclosing that it contains the caramel-coloring chemical 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI), identified by the state as a carcinogen under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). Ree v. PepsiCo, Inc., No. 14-0328 (C.D. Cal., filed March 4, 2014). According to the complaint, the absence of the disclosure “was a material and substantial factor which influenced [the plaintiff’s] decision to purchase Pepsi One. In fact, Plaintiff would not have purchased the Product had she known that it contained 4-MEI well in excess of Proposition 65 guidelines.” The plaintiff includes information from a Consumer Reports article about…
According to a news source, counsel for POM Wonderful LLC has urged federal district court Judge Dean Pregerson to decertify the nationwide class action he certified in consolidated false advertising multidistrict litigation, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast v. Behrend and the plaintiffs’ failure to establish a valid damages model supported the company’s request. In re POM Wonderful LLC Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2199 (C.D. Cal., motion argued March 3, 2014). Additional information about the court’s decision to certify the class appears in Issue 457 of this Update. While the judge did not rule on the motion, he apparently expressed skepticism about whether the plaintiffs would be able to establish that class members purchased the juice for its various advertised health benefits only, rather than buying it for other reasons, such as taste, color or shelf location. He also reportedly asked whether the class certification…
A federal court in California has granted a motion for sanctions filed by Jackson Family Wines, which brought an infringement action against Diageo North America; an adverse inference instruction will be given to the jury during trial, and the plaintiff will be able to recover the costs of its efforts to secure a Diageo marketing department employee’s documents, destroyed while the lawsuit was pending. Jackson Family Wines v. Diageo N. Am., Inc., No. 11-5639 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 14, 2014). At issue in the litigation is the alleged infringement of Jackson’s La Crema wine by Diageo’s Crème de Lys wine brand. The employee whose laptop was “imaged” outside the firm after she temporarily left Diageo’s employ was, in Diageo’s words, “the conduit between Diageo’s marketing team and Northstar [Research Partners, LLC], the third-party market research company” that conducted focus groups for the selection of the Crème de Lys brand.…
A federal court in California has denied the plaintiff’s request to certify a class of those who purchased ZonePerfect Nutrition bars relying on allegedly deceptive labels representing the products as “All Natural.” Sethavanish v. ZonePerfect Nutrition Co., No. 12-2907 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 13, 2014). The court found that the plaintiff set forth sufficient evidence to establish that she had standing for the purpose of class certification, despite paying more for other nutrition bars and sometimes purchasing non-natural products. Because the defendant “overwhelmingly sells to retailers, not directly to consumers, and . . . there are no records identifying any but a small fraction of consumers who have purchased ZonePerfect bars in the last several years,” the court, however, agreed with the defendant that neither the class nor the quantity of nutrition bars each member purchased were ascertainable other than by affidavit. As to ascertainability, the court noted a…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has entered a consent decree with the Center for Food Safety, which sued the agency over its alleged failure to comply with implementation rulemaking deadlines in the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). Ctr. for Food Safety v. Hamburg, No. 12-4529 (N.D. Cal., decree filed February 20, 2014). Under the agreement, FDA will withdraw its Ninth Circuit appeal and will comply with the following timeline for the adoption of final rules: (i) Preventive Controls for Human Food and Preventive Controls for Animal Food—August 30, 2015; (ii) Foreign Supplier Verification Program, Produce Safety Standards, and Accreditation of Third Party Auditors—October 31, 2015; (iii) Sanitary Transport of Food and Feed—March 31, 2016; and (iv) Intentional Contamination— May 31, 2016. The deadlines may be extended by written agreement of the parties and court approval if “FDA believes good cause exists to seek an extension.” If agreement is…
A federal court in California has dismissed with prejudice the third amended complaint filed by named plaintiffs on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Chobani Greek Yogurt products, alleging violations of state consumer protection laws because the products were mislabeled under federal law by listing evaporated cane juice (ECJ), instead of sugar, as an ingredient and stating that the yogurts contain only natural ingredients, when they actually contain fruit and vegetable juice—purportedly “highly processed unnatural substances”—as well as turmeric for color. Kane v. Chobani, Inc., No. 12-2425 (N.D. Cal., decided February 20, 2014). The court agreed with Chobani that the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently allege reliance or to plead fraud with sufficient particularity and thus lacked standing to pursue their claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act. Apparently annoyed that the plaintiffs had been given numerous opportunities to cure pleading…
A federal court in California has preliminarily approved a $3.375 million settlement of class-action claims that Trader Joe’s misled consumers throughout the United States by selling a number of food products with “All Natural” labels despite the presence of synthetic or artificial ingredients. Larsen v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 11-5188 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 6, 2014). Additional details about the complaint appear in Issue 415 of this Update. According to a news source, the agreement would provide class members with proof of purchase the average price of the purchased items. Those without proof of purchase would receive between $2.70 and $39.99. The grocery chain has also apparently agreed to stop advertising the products as “all natural.” The final approval hearing has been scheduled for July 9, 2014. See Law360, February 7, 2014. Issue 513
A California resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Suja Life, LLC, alleging that the company, which advertises and labels its juice products as “raw” and “cold-pressed,” misleads consumers because it uses a high pressure processing (HPP) treatment that alters the nutrients and live enzymes that raw-product purchasers wish to consume. Heikkila v. Suja Life, LLC, No. 14-0556 (N.D. Cal., filed February 5, 2014). Claiming that HPP’s effects on juice products are “identical to those of traditional pasteurization—inactivated enzymes, inactivated probiotics, altered physical properties of the product, and denatured proteins, among other undesirable qualities,” the plaintiff alleges that the products “are nothing more than run-of-the-mill, processed juices.” According to the complaint, the plaintiff reviewed the company’s Website, packaging and labeling before making her purchase and paid a premium price for the products. She contends that raw juices have a short shelf life and are thus more expensive than…
