A consumer has filed a projected class action alleging Newman’s Own, Inc. misleadingly markets its pasta sauce products as natural despite containing citric acid. Wong v. Newman’s Own, Inc., No. 16-6690 (E.D.N.Y., filed November 30, 2016). The complaint asserts the company “deceptively used the term ‘natural’ to describe a product containing ingredients that have been either extensively chemically processed or fundamentally altered from their natural state and thus cannot be considered ‘minimally processed.’” The plaintiff admits “there is not an exacting definition of ‘natural’ in reference to food,” but cites the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a decision from the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 2005 Food Standards and Labeling Policy Book to support his definition. For alleged violations of New York’s consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, restitution, damages, an injunction and attorney’s fees. Issue 625
Tag Archives citric acid
A consumer has filed a purported class action against PepsiCo and subsidiary Izze Beverage Co. alleging Izze carbonated juice drinks are misleadingly marketed as containing “no preservatives” despite the presence of citric or ascorbic acid. Lindberg v. PepsiCo Inc., No. 16-6569 (S.D.N.Y., filed August 19, 2016). The complaint also challenges Izze’s claim that each bottle “delivers two servings of fruit based on [U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)] 2010 Dietary Guidelines,” which is misleading because “the USDA did away with this measure of servings in its 2010 Guidelines precisely because it misleads consumers about how much of various food groups they should eat or drink.” The plaintiff asserts the dietary guidelines claim is also misleading because it “falsely suggests that Izze Sodas contain the nutritional value and health benefits that can be obtained by eating fruit. Whole fruit contains fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Even if Izze Sodas were originally manufactured with…
A consumer has filed a projected class action against Drew’s LLC, maker of Drew’s salad dressings and marinades, alleging the company misrepresents its products as “all natural” because they contain xanthan gum, disodium phosphate, lactic acid and citric acid. Haack v. Drew’s LLC, No. 16-6022 (S.D.N.Y., filed July 28, 2016). The complaint cites draft guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture distinguishing natural and synthetic ingredients and guidelines from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to support the argument that a reasonable consumer would be confused by the company’s use of “natural” on its packaging. “Consumers lack the meaningful ability to test or independently ascertain or verify whether a product is natural, especially at the point of sale,” the plaintiff asserts. “Consumers would not know the true Nature of the ingredients merely by reading the ingredients label.” For alleged fraud and violations of New York and other state consumer-protection laws,…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Herr Foods Inc., maker of potato chips, popcorn and cheese curls products, alleging the company mislabels its foods as preservative-free despite containing citric acid. Hu v. Herr Foods Inc., No. 16-3313 (E.D.N.Y., filed June 20, 2016). The complaint alleges Herr seeks “to capitalize on consumers’ preference for natural products and the association between such products and a wholesome way of life” by labeling the products as free of preservatives, but the products contain citric acid, “a non-natural, chemically processed ingredient and preservative.” For allegations of misrepresentation, breach of warranties and unjust enrichment as well as violations of New York consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, restitution, damages, an injunction and attorney’s fees. Issue 609
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Kimlan Foods U.S.A. alleging the company misrepresents its jarred preserved-food products as having “No Preservatives Added” despite containing citric acid. Hu v. Golden Orchid, Ltd., No. 16-2234 (E.D.N.Y., filed May 4, 2016). The plaintiff purchased a 14-ounce jar of pickled cucumbers at a supermarket in New York, allegedly relying on the “No Preservatives” claims when choosing the product, then later discovered that citric acid is “a non-natural, highly chemically processed ingredient regularly used as a preservative (due to its acidic pH level which creates an environment where bacteria cannot thrive) in ready-to-drink tea products.” The complaint further argues that although “the acidic pH of citric acid would most certainly provide tartness to the Products, such explanation is pretextual because the real function of the citric acid in the Products is as a preservative.” For alleged violations of New York consumer-protection laws, negligent…
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging Outernational Brands, Inc. mislabels its Vivaloe aloe-vera beverages as “All Natural” and preservative-free even though the products contain citric acid. Chen v. Outernational Brands, Inc., No. 16-1634 (E.D.N.Y., filed April 4, 2016). “The term ‘All Natural’ only applies to those products that contain no non-natural or synthetic ingredients and consist entirely of ingredients that are only minimally processed,” the complaint asserts. The plaintiff argues that the presence of citric acid, “which is not extracted from citric fruits but industrially synthesized via complex chemical synthetic routes and thus cannot be considered ‘minimally processed,’” precludes Outernational from labeling Vivaloe as “All Natural” or free of preservatives. The complaint admits the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not defined “natural,” but argues “there is no reasonable definition of ‘All Natural’ that includes ingredients that, even if sourced from ‘nature,’ are subjected to extensive transformative…
A New York consumer has filed a putative class action against Victoria Fine Foods alleging the company falsely advertises its vodka sauce as “all natural” and free of preservatives despite containing citric acid. Shmidt v. Victoria Fine Foods, No. 16-0230 (E.D.N.Y., filed January 15, 2016). The complaint asserts that Victoria “sought to capitalize on consumers’ preference for natural products and the association between such products and a wholesome way of life.” The plaintiff argues that the primary jurisdiction doctrine does not apply because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “has repeatedly declined to adopt formal rule-making that would define the word ‘natural,” although she asserts that FDA “has loosely defined the term ‘natural’ as a product that ‘does not contain added color, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.’” The complaint also cites the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Standards and Labeling Policy Book, “which states that the term ‘natural’ may…
A consumer has filed a putative class action in New York federal court against Tribe Mediterranean Foods alleging that its hummus is not “all natural” because the product contains genetically modified (GM) ingredients, including canola oil and citric acid. Magier v. Tribe Mediterranean Foods, No. 15-5781 (S.D.N.Y., filed July 23, 2015). The complaint asserts that the “all natural” claim on the label precludes Tribe from using any artificial or synthetic ingredients in the hummus, and the plaintiff argues that she paid a higher price for the product believing it to be free of synthetic or GM ingredients. She claims that Tribe violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and New York consumer protection statutes and further alleges fraud, unjust enrichment and misrepresentation claims. Meanwhile, in New York state court, a group of consumers has reportedly filed a lawsuit alleging that John Wm. Macy Cheese Crisps, Cheese Sticks and Sweet Sticks contain synthetic…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Unilever U.S., PepsiCo and the Pepsi Lipton Tea Partnership alleging that their line of Pure Leaf® Iced Teas are misleadingly labeled as “All Natural” and preservative-free because they contain citric acid, a synthetic ingredient. Ren v. Unilever U.S., Inc., No. 156463/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., filed June 26, 2015). The complaint asserts that Pure Leaf® labels indicate that the products are natural and contain no preservatives despite containing citric acid, which is “industrially manufactured by fermenting certain genetically mutant strains of the black mold fungus, Aspergillus niger.” The companies use citric acid as a preservative, the complaint argues, and it disputes the accuracy of a note in the ingredient list explaining that citric acid provides tartness. The plaintiff seeks class certification, declaratory judgments, damages, restitution, an injunction, and attorney’s fees for allegations of unjust enrichment, breach of warranties, negligent misrepresentation and violations…
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that Capri Sun®, a product of Kraft Foods Group, is misleadingly represented as “natural” because it contains citric acid and “natural flavor.” Osborne v. Kraft Foods Grp., Inc., No. 15-2653 (N.D. Cal., filed June 12, 2015). The complaint asserts that citric acid is created synthetically through the fermentation of glucose, while “natural flavor” is made of “unnatural, synthetic, artificial and/or genetically modified ingredients,” so neither ingredient should be part of a “natural”-labeled product. Kraft charged a premium for Capri Sun® based on that label, the plaintiff argues, and deceived consumers into relying upon that label misrepresentation when purchasing. She seeks class certification, an injunction, damages and attorney’s fees for alleged negligent misrepresentation and violations of California’s consumer-protection statutes. Issue 570
