Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts

A consumer has filed a lawsuit alleging that he contracted Salmonella from beef supplied to a restaurant by JBS Tolleson Inc. Rozich v. JBS Tolleson Inc., No. 18-1929 (D. Nev., filed October 8, 2018). The plaintiff alleges his infection stemmed from an outbreak of Salmonella that resulted in JBS recalling nearly seven million pounds of beef on October 4, 2018. The complaint cites a July 2017 notice from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service purportedly alleging a JBS facility president enabled “‘egregious’ and ‘inhumane’ practices with livestock.” The plaintiff seeks damages and costs for allegations of strict product liability, negligence and breach of warranty.

Three consumers have filed a putative class action alleging that Arizona Beverage Co.’s teas, energy drinks and fruit juices are misleadingly marketed as containing “no preservatives” despite containing citric and ascorbic acids. Kubilius v. Arizona Beverage Co., No. 18-9075 (S.D.N.Y., filed October 3, 2018). The plaintiffs assert that they paid a premium for the products believing them to be preservative-free but later discovered that the products contain citric and ascorbic acid, which allegedly “serve as preservatives by functioning as sequestrants, removing compounds and elements from their environment so as to slow the degradation of food and beverages.” The complaint also cites a declaration from a food scientist who asserts that “while citric acid and ascorbic acid can also be employed by a manufacturer that intends to impart taste, a greater quantity of these substances is required to impart taste than to preserve foods and beverages. … Even if imparting taste…

A California federal court has granted class certification to a group of consumers alleging that Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. misrepresented its food as made without genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Schneider v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., No. 16-2200 (N.D. Cal., entered September 29, 2018). Chipotle has faced a number of similar suits, but other iterations have been dismissed. The court found that the plaintiffs met each of the requirements for class certification, rejecting Chipotle's argument that each class member may have seen significantly different marketing messages. "Plaintiffs rely primarily on the advertisements and statements issued and installed in all of Chipotle's stores," the court found, noting that three advertisements supported the plaintiffs' claims. "Based on Plaintiffs’ theory that 'reasonable consumers understood Non-GMO to include meat and dairy ingredients that were not sourced from animals fed GM feed,' [] the Court finds that the representations made on these three in-store signs are…

Consumers have filed lawsuits alleging that companies misrepresent their products as "natural" because they contain d-malic acid. One lawsuit targets Ocean Spray Cranberries Inc., alleging it mislabels its juices as free from artificial flavors despite containing d-malic acid rather than the naturally occurring l-malic acid. Froio v. Ocean Spray Cranberries Inc., No. 18-12005 (D. Mass., filed September 24, 2018). The complaint further alleges that the juices contain furmaric acid, which is "manufactured from petrochemical feedstock, either benzene or butane, through chemical transformation to maleic anhydride." The plaintiffs argue that a "reasonable consumer understands Defendant's claims that the Products contain no 'artificial' flavoring to mean that the flavoring is derived from a natural source." For allegations of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and violations of New York and Massachusetts consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiffs seek class certification, damages, injunctive relief, restitution and attorney's fees. Two consumers have alleged that Neurobrands LLC also…

A New York federal court has dismissed allegations from a putative class action arguing that Pret A Manger Ltd. sold sandwich wraps with excess slack fill between the wrap's halves. Lau v. Pret A Manger (USA) Ltd., No. 17-5775 (S.D.N.Y., entered September 28, 2018). The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing for an injunction despite their argument that they would consider purchasing the wraps in the future, finding "no sufficient basis for inferring that plaintiffs would ever seek to purchase a Pret wrap again as long as the status quo persists." The court also disagreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the slack fill in the wraps amounted to an intent to defraud consumers. "Specifically, plaintiffs state that less than half, or 45 percent, or Pret wraps surveyed contained slack-fill," the court noted. "Drawing all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs' favor, the Court finds that the facts are insufficient to nudge…

A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that Stremick's Heritage Foods misrepresents its  Kern's juice as a "healthful, natural juice product made solely from fresh fruits" despite being "almost entirely sugar-water, with a small amount of fruit juice added for color and texture." Levin v. Stremick's Heritage Foods, No. 18-1748 (C.D. Cal., filed September 26, 2018). The complaint alleges that the juices "consist of 70% water and high fructose corn syrup, topped with 30% or less of the juice of the fruit for which the Products are named." The complaint also alleges that "pictorial representations" of "life-like" fruits on the packaging mislead consumers about the beverages' juice content. The plaintiff further argues that the products contain "massive amounts of refined sugar. The 'Apricot Nectar' Product, for example, contains 47 grams of sugar per serving—more than Grape Kool-Aid." According to the complaint, the juices are not healthful because excess…

A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that Barilla America Inc. misleads consumers because its pasta sauces, which are labeled as including "No Preservatives," contain citric acid. Kubilius v. Barilla Am. Inc., No. 18-6656 (N.D. Ill., E. Div., filed October 1, 2018). The complaint contends that several authorities identify citric acid as a preservative, including "insiders in the preservative manufacturing and distribution industries" and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which allegedly "expressly classifies citric acid as a preservative in its Overview of Food Ingredients, Additives, and Colors." The plaintiff seeks class certification, damages, restitution, injunctions and attorney's fees for allegations of fraud and violations of New York and Illinois consumer-protection statutes.

A Colorado federal court has dismissed the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC's) lawsuit alleging JBS USA discriminated against Muslim workers by denying prayer breaks. EEOC v. JBS USA, No. 10-2103 (D. Colo., entered September 24, 2018). The court found that EEOC failed to prove that JBS suspended or fired the workers in an effort to deny requested religious accommodations. A Nebraska court dismissed similar claims against the company in October 2013.

A New York federal court has dismissed a putative class action alleging that Dunkin' Brands Inc. misled consumers by marketing a sandwich and a wrap as containing "Angus steak." Chen v. Dunkin' Brands, Inc., No. 17-3808 (E.D.N.Y., entered September 17, 2018). The court first dismissed the claims brought by a non-resident of New York, finding it did not have jurisdiction to consider them. The court also dismissed the resident plaintiff's breach-of-warranty allegation under the Magnuson-Moss Act, holding that the description "Angus beef" is "'at most' a 'product description,' not a written warranty." Turning to the state-law claim of deceptive practices, the court disagreed with the plaintiff's argument that a reasonable consumer would interpret "Angus steak" as "an intact cut of meat," finding that the television commercials show "zoomed-in pictures of the sandwich and wrap, with ground-meat patties." The plaintiff also asserted that the beef patties contained additives and preservatives, which…

Two California courts have dismissed lawsuits brought by a competitor alleging kombucha companies misrepresented the amount of sugar and alcohol in their products. Tortilla Factory LLC v. Rowdy Mermaid Kombucha LLC, No. 18-2984 (C.D. Cal., entered September 11, 2018); Tortilla Factory LLC v. Better Booch LLC, No. 18-2980 (C.D. Cal., entered September 13, 2018). In April 2018, Tortilla Factory filed several lawsuits alleging that a number of its competitors, including Rowdy Mermaid Kombucha and Better Booch, misrepresent the alcohol and sugar content in their beverages in violation of federal law. The court in Rowdy Mermaid found that Tortilla Factory did not suffer an injury from Rowdy Mermaid's conduct; while the plaintiff argued that the companies are "vying for the same dollars from the same consumers," it failed to argue that "the two companies' products are sold in the same stores, through the same channels, or even in the same geographic…

Close