A federal court in California has dismissed with prejudice the breach of warranty claims made by a putative class as to purportedly “misbranded food products” sold by 7-Eleven, but dismissed the remaining consumer fraud claims without prejudice to allow the plaintiff to amend the complaint to meet the stringent pleading requirements for fraud-based allegations. Bishop v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 12-2621 (N.D. Cal., order entered August 5, 2013). While the plaintiff defined “misbranded food products” as pertaining to potato chips, pretzels and other foods labeled “0 grams Trans Fat,” “No Cholesterol,” “All Natural,” “Fresh to Go,” “guaranteed fresh,” or “Fresh,” as well as products “sold in oversized slack filled container,” the court determined that he failed to “provide a clear and particular account of the allegedly fraudulent, deceptive, misrepresentative, or otherwise unlawful statements” and failed to “unambiguously specify the particular products that have violated particular labeling requirements, the allegedly unlawful representations that…
Category Archives 9th Circuit
A federal court in California has granted motions to certify California classes of consumers in two separate consumer-fraud lawsuits involving the “all natural” claims on products made by Bear Naked, Inc. and the Kashi Co. Thurston v. Bear Naked, Inc., No. 11-2890, Astiana v. Kashi Co., No. 11-1967 (S.D. Cal., orders entered July 30, 2013). Details about the latter suit, a consolidated matter, appear under the plaintiff’s name Bates in Issue 408 of this Update. The court agreed with Bear Naked that the named plaintiffs failed to sufficiently show that “natural” has a uniform definition among class members, that a sufficient number of class members would have relied to their detriment on the representation or that the company’s “representation of natural in light of the presence of the challenged ingredients would be considered to be a material falsehood by class members.” Still, the court determined that the plaintiff made a sufficient showing of…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has filed a motion for reconsideration or stay of a court order establishing rulemaking deadlines under the Food Safety Modernization Act. Ctr. for Food Safety v. Hamburg, No. 12-4529 (N.D. Cal., Oakland Div., motion filed July 19, 2013). More information about the litigation appears in Issues 481, 487 and 489 of this Update. Scheduled to be heard on August 28, 2013, the motion contends that two of the seven rulemakings at issue, the sanitary transport rule and the intentional adulteration rule, pose challenges that preclude their issuance by the court’s deadline. Requesting that the court reconsider its order largely on the basis of arguments already rejected, the agency also asks the court to stay the order pending the Solicitor General’s determination whether to authorize an appeal and, if an appeal is authorized, while the appeal is pending.
Two California residents who filed a putative class action in a California federal court against, among others, a company that makes “Horizon,” “Silk,” “International Delight,” and “Land O’Lakes” brand products with labels including as an ingredient “evaporated cane juice” in alleged violation of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requirements, have filed a complaint in intervention and motions to set aside a nationwide class settlement approved by a federal court in Florida. Singer v. WWF Operating Co., No. 13-21232 (S.D. Fla., filed July 12, 2013). According to the California plaintiffs, the Florida action was filed on April 8, 2013, as a statewide putative class action and then amended nine days later for purposes of securing preliminary approval of a nationwide class settlement. The California plaintiffs filed their putative statewide class action on April 29 and allege that they had extensive communications with defendant’s counsel who requested from them a 30-day extension…
A Hawaii resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Cargill, Inc., alleging that the company falsely advertises its Truvia® sweetener product as “natural” when it is actually made from ingredients that are “either synthetic or harshly chemically processed.” Howerton v. Cargill, Inc., No. 13-0336 (D. Haw., filed July 8, 2013). According to the complaint, the company markets the product with “natural imagery such as the leaves of the stevia plant,” yet “the stevia-derived ingredient, Reb A, is not the natural crude preparation of stevia, but rather is a highly chemically processed and purified form of the stevia leaf extract,” and Reb A “comprises only 1% of Truvia.” The plaintiff alleges that “the main ingredient, erythritol, which Cargill also purports to be a natural ingredient derived through natural processes, is not made like it is in nature, but rather is synthetically made. Cargill describes the process of obtaining stevia…
A federal court in California has dismissed some of the consumer fraud claims filed against Chobani, Inc. in putative class litigation alleging that the company mislabels its yogurts as containing “evaporated cane juice,” misleads consumers by stating that its products do not contain added sugar and falsely states that its products are “all natural” because they contain artificial ingredients, flavorings, coloring, and chemical preservatives. Kane v. Chobani, Inc., No. 12-2425 (N.D. Cal., order entered July 12, 2013). The court granted with leave to amend (i) the motion to dismiss as to the evaporated cane juice claims to the extent they are based on products not purchased by the plaintiffs; and (ii) the motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) claims based on the “no sugar added” and “all natural” representations, finding that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently allege…
A federal court in California has dismissed without prejudice a putative class action alleging that Wholesoy & Co. misleads consumers by (i) listing “organic evaporated cane juice” instead of “sugar” or “dried cane syrup” as an ingredient on its soy yogurt products in violation of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling rules, and (ii) marketing its soy product as yogurt because it fails to comply with FDA’s standard of identity for “yogurt.” Hood v. Wholesoy & Co., No. 12-5550 (N.D. Cal., decided July 12, 2013). The court agreed with the company that the complaint must be dismissed under the primary jurisdiction doctrine because its resolution would require the court to decide an issue committed to the agency’s expertise “without a clear indication of how FDA would view the issue.” Specifically, the court found that the evaporated cane juice guidance document on which the plaintiff relied is expressly “not a ‘legally…
Naked Juice Co. has agreed to settle putative class claims that it falsely advertised some of its juice and smoothie products as “all natural” and not genetically modified (GMO); while denying the allegations, the company will establish a $9 million settlement fund. Pappas v. Naked Juice Co. of Glendora, Inc., No. 11-8276 (C.D. Cal., motion for preliminary approval filed July 2, 2013). Members of the putative nationwide class will each be eligible under the proposed agreement to recover a maximum of $45 dollars. The agreement will also require Naked Juice to establish a product verification program, hire or assign a quality control manager to oversee the independent testing process for the company’s product line, establish a database to allow the electronic tracking and verification of product ingredients, and modify future labeling, advertising and marketing to cease using “All Natural” and related statements.
A coalition of animal rights organizations has sued U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), claiming that the agency failed to conduct a required environmental review before granting the application of a “horse slaughter plant operator in New Mexico, bringing the nation closer to its first horse slaughter operation since federal courts and state lawmakers shuttered the last three U.S.-based plants in 2007.” Front Range Equine Rescue v. Vilsack, No. 13-3034 (N.D. Cal., San Francisco Div., filed July 2, 2013). The parties agreed to voluntarily transfer the suit to the District of New Mexico as a more appropriate venue, and the court entered an order granting the transfer on July 10, 2013. Because the defendants advised the plaintiffs that no federal inspections at horse slaughter facilities will take place before July 29, the court vacated its expedited scheduling order. In their complaint,…
A federal court in California has dismissed in part and granted in part allegations in a second amended, putative class complaint filed against three food and beverage companies for alleged violations of state consumer fraud laws in the labeling claims on a plethora of products including chewing gum, juices, cookies, crackers, granola, stuffing, and cheese. Ivie v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., No. 12-2554 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered June 28, 2013). Information about a previous ruling in the case appears in Issue 473 of this Update. The court dismissed with prejudice (i) the plaintiff’s claim that a “natural flavors” label on Crystal Light® is misleading because the product contains artificial flavors; the court found that the two specific ingredients alleged to be “artificial” flavors are artificial ingredients and nothing in the Food and Drug Administration regulations suggests that potassium citrate and sodium citrate are flavors; and (ii) the…
