Court Says Puréed Fruit Is “Real Fruit,” Dismisses Consumer Fraud Claims

Calling it “ridiculous to say that consumers would expect snack food ‘made
with real fruit’ to contain only ‘actual strawberries or raspberries,’ rather than
these fruits in a form amenable to being squeezed inside a Newton,” a federal
court in California has dismissed without leave to amend consumer fraud
claims against the company that makes Nabisco strawberry and raspberry
Newton cookies. Manchouck v. Mondeléz Int’l Inc., No. 13-2148
(N.D. Cal., decided September 26, 2013).

The court determined that the plaintiff had Article III standing without alleging physical injury because this is not the sole measurement of injury-in-fact and the plaintiff alleged that she had paid a premium price for the products which she would not have purchased “at that price point absent the alleged misstatements.” The court agreed with the defendant, however, that the plaintiff had failed to meet the plausibility pleading standard set forth in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009).

According to the court, “Here, the complaint alleges that a reasonable
consumer would think that Newtons ‘made with real fruit’ exclude fruit purée.
This strains credibility. First, the complaint does not dispute that the cookies
contain real fruits in purée form. Second, even the most narrow definition
of ‘real fruit’ does not exclude fruit that has been strained or blended
into puréed form. Third, the packaging that said, ‘made with real fruit,’ also
prominently displays a depiction of the cookies’ puréed fruit filling. Fourth,
the amended complaint admits that the list of ingredients on the packaging
serves notice to consumers that the products contain, ‘Raspberry Purée’ and
‘Strawberry Purée’ respectively.” The complaint also apparently failed to allege
why the puréed forms of fruit are no longer “real fruit.”