Organic Labeling-Based Claims Dismissed as Preempted

Addressing a question of first impression, a California appeals court has
dismissed a putative class action alleging that Herb Thyme Farms mislabeled
its certified organically grown herbs as “USDA Organic” because the contents
included a mix of organically and conventionally grown herbs. Quesada v.
Herb Thyme Farms, Inc., No. B239602 (Cal. Ct. App., 2d Dist., Div. 3, decided
December 23, 2013). According to the court, on appeal, the plaintiff changed
her theory of liability from alleged violations of state consumer protection
laws to violation of the California Organic Products Act of 2003, a federally
approved state organic program. She cited Farm Raised Salmon Cases, 42 Cal.
4th 1077 (2008), to counter the trial court’s conclusion that her claims were
preempted under federal law.

Distinguishing Farm Raised Salmon Cases, the court was guided instead by Aurora Dairy Corp. Organic Milk Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation v. Aurora Organic Dairy, 621 F.3d 781 (8th Cir. 2010), in which the court determined that “state consumer law claims against a certified grower alleging mislabeling are preempted if these claims rely on proof of facts that, if found by the certification agent, would have precluded certification, or would have caused a revocation or suspension of certification.” According to the court, the federal Organic Foods Product Act of 1990 manifests Congress’s “intention to preclude private enforcement through state consumer lawsuits in order to achieve its objective of establishing a national standard for the use of ‘organic’ and ‘USDA Organic’ in labeling agricultural products.”

Dismissing the claims on preemption grounds, the court did not address
Herb Thyme’s invocation of the primary jurisdiction doctrine as an alternative
ground to affirm the lower court’s judgment.

Issue 509