Crunchberries® Cereal Not Misleading, Says Federal Court

A federal court in California has dismissed a putative class action alleging that the maker of Cap’n Crunch with Crunchberries® cereal misrepresented its product in violation of the state’s Business & Professions Code. Sugawara v. Pepsico, Inc., No. 08-01335 (E.D. Cal., decided May 21, 2009). Plaintiff alleged that the colorful “Crunchberries” depicted on the cereal box, combined with the use of the word “berry” in the product name, convey the message that the product contains fruit. She claimed that she purchased the product for some four years because she had been misled by defendant’s advertising and misrepresentations, never discerning that the product has no berries of any kind and that the only fruit content is “strawberry fruit concentrate, twelfth in order on the ingredient list.”

According to the court, “while the challenged packaging contains the word ‘berries’ it does so only in conjunction with the descriptive term ‘crunch.’ This Court is not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual fruit referred to as a ‘crunchberry.’” The court also noted that Crunchberries® “are round, crunchy, brightly-colored cereal balls, and the [principal product display panel] clearly states both that the Product contains ‘sweetened corn & oat cereal’ and that the cereal is ‘enlarged to show texture.’ Thus, a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that the Product in the instant case contained a fruit that does not exist.”

The court found that the plaintiff failed to state her claims as a matter of law. Granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss, the court refused to give the plaintiff leave to amend her complaint because “it is simply impossible for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint stating a claim based on these facts. The survival of the instant claim would require this Court to ignore all concepts of personal responsibility and common sense. The Court has no intention of allowing that to happen.”