A federal court in California has denied the plaintiff’s motion for class certification in a suit alleging that Ben & Jerry’s Homemade deceives consumers by using “all natural” on labels for ice cream, frozen yogurt and popsicle products that contain alkalized cocoa. Astiana v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., No. 10-4387 (N.D. Cal., decided January 7, 2014). Additional details about the lawsuit appear in Issue 366 of this Update. The action followed the court’s September 2012 denial of final approval for a class-action settlement in the case on the basis of issues raised by Dennis v. Kellogg, 697 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2012). Among other matters, the court agreed with the defendant that the plaintiff failed to establish that the class was ascertainable and that common issues predominate over individual issues. While the case was initially brought on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers, in its current posture, a…
Tag Archives natural
A California resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Pacific Foods of Oregon, Inc., alleging that the company falsely labels its Hemp NonDairy Beverage® products as “all natural” despite the presence of processed and artificial ingredients and misbrands them by listing as an ingredient “evaporated cane juice.” Perera v. Pac. Foods of Or., Inc., No. 13-1788 (C.D. Cal., filed November 13, 2013). Plaintiff Sadisha Perera claims that she purchased one specific beverage relying on the prominent “all natural” labeling, but seeks to represent class members who purchased a number of other hemp non-dairy products that are purportedly substantially similar. According to the plaintiff, she would not have purchased the products if she had known that ingredients, such as calcium phosphate, disodium phosphate, xanthan gum, and certain vitamins, listed on the product in smaller print, were non-natural. She claims that she did not get the benefit of the bargain…
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss putative class claims that Jamba Juice falsely labels its frozen smoothie kits as “all natural,” finding that while the plaintiffs lack standing to assert claims related to products they did not buy, “they may seek to represent a class of people who have purchased those products, as long as all plaintiffs, named and absent, have standing in their own right, and as long as the prerequisites to class certification are satisfied.” Lilly v. Jamba Juice Co., No. 13-2998 (N.D. Cal., order entered November 18, 2013). The court will address whether the named plaintiffs may represent the proposed class at class certification and ordered them to file their certification motion by February 3, 2014.
California residents have filed a putative class action against Whole Foods Market, alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling certain snack products as “All Natural” because they contain “the synthetic chemical ingredient Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, among other synthetic ingredients (e.g., Maltodextrin).” Garrison v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 13-5222 (N.D. Cal., filed November 8, 2013). Seeking to certify statewide and nationwide classes, the plaintiffs claim that they relied on the truthfulness of the “product label’s promise that these Products were ‘All Natural,’” paid a price premium over products that are not all natural, “ingested a substance that was other than what was represented,” and “ingested a product that did not bring the health benefits Defendant promised.” The products at issue include mini muffins, soft-baked cookies and an array of gluten-free products, including apple pie, cheddar biscuits, corn bread, cookies, and cupcakes. While the plaintiffs mention various claims that the…
According to Wall Street Journal reporter Mike Esterl, products with the “natural” or “all natural” label represented $40 billion in retail sales in the United States in the preceding 12 months and market researchers have found that more than 50 percent of Americans seek the “all natural” label when they shop for food. Still, food and beverage companies have begun “quietly removing” these words from their product labels under pressure from dozens of lawsuits filed during the past two years challenging the terminology as false and deceptive. Esterl notes that the litigation is complicated due to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) decision not to define the terms. He observes that courts have, in recent months, stayed several of these lawsuits and referred questions to FDA about whether the “natural” designation can be used on products containing genetically modified (GM) ingredients. Details about the latest referral by a federal court…
A federal court in New Jersey has, on the basis of the primary jurisdiction doctrine, halted proceedings alleging that General Mills misleads consumers by labeling its Kix® cereals with bioengineered corn as “made with all natural corn.” In re General Mills, Inc. Kix Cereal Litig., No. 12-249 (D.N.J., order entered November 1, 2013). Citing rulings from California and Colorado referring the matter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for resolution, the court stated that “the issue of whether products may be labeled ‘Natural’ when they are made with bioengineered forms of corn falls within the expertise of the FDA and deference to the FDA’s regulatory authority is appropriate here.” Information about the Colorado litigation appears in Issue 492 of this Update. The court “administratively terminated” (i) the action “until such time as the FDA responds to this referral” or the referrals in the two other cases, and (ii) the…
A federal court in Washington has dismissed the second amended consumer fraud complaint filed against Costco Wholesale Corp. concerning its VitaRain® Enhanced Water Beverage; while the court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend, it did not dismiss it with prejudice. Maple v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 12-5166 (E.D. Wash., order entered November 1, 2013). The plaintiff claimed that the name “VitaRain” is itself deceptive, and the court disagreed, finding it implausible that it could “deceive a substantial portion of the public into believing that the beverage is ‘full of vitamins only’ or that it is a ‘nutritional’ or ‘healthy’ beverage. The name ‘VitaRain’ is largely nonsensical.” The plaintiff also associated the name with another beverage product containing the word “vitamin,” and the court stated in this regard, “Plaintiff’s claim must be limited to the actual representation, ‘VitaRain’ in this case, and not some imagined representation he arrived at through…
A federal court in California has significantly narrowed the consumer-fraud claims that may be asserted against Frito-Lay involving a number of its snack products labeled as “All Natural,” “0 Grams Trans Fat” and “No MSG.” Wilson v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., No. 12-1586 (N.D. Cal., order entered October 24, 2013). All claims dismissed were with prejudice. The court dismissed claims based on products the plaintiffs did not purchase, because they failed to specify how or whether the 85 products added in their second amended complaint were substantially similar to the purchased products. The court also dismissed any claims based on statements the company made on its website. According to the court, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may have warned other companies about whether their Websites constituted labeling, but it had not done so as to the defendant’s products. The court also said, “The website address appears below Defendant’s physical address,…
A federal court in California has denied the request of General Mills, Inc. to stay the proceedings in three putative class actions alleging that it misleads consumers by promoting various products as “100% Natural” given ingredients that are genetically modified or highly processed, such as high-fructose corn syrup, high-maltose corn syrup and maltodextrin. Rojas v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-5099 (N.D. Cal., order entered October 9, 2013); Bohac v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-5280, and Janney v. General Mills, Inc., No. 12-3919 (N.D. Cal., orders entered October 10, 2013). So ruling, the court rejected the defendant’s request that it apply the primary jurisdiction doctrine, finding that (i) the issue of whether a reasonable consumer would be misled by the company’s product promotions was within the court’s purview, and (ii) it did not appear the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was inclined to decide anytime soon what the term “natural” encompasses. In Rojas,…
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss filed in a putative nationwide class action alleging that Blue Diamond Growers misled consumers by labeling its almond milk products and snack foods as “all natural” and representing that they contain “evaporated cane juice,” (ECJ) in violation of federal labeling requirements incorporated into state law. Werdebaugh v. Blue Diamond Growers, No. 12-2724 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered October 2, 2013). The court determined that the claims were not preempted by federal law or the primary jurisdiction doctrine, the plaintiff had standing to pursue claims regarding substantially similar products that he did not purchase, the claims were pleaded with sufficient particularity, and the defendant’s conflict-of-laws challenge was premature.
