A federal court in California has dismissed with limited leave to amend the second amended complaint filed on behalf of a putative nationwide class against Welch Foods, alleging that the company’s juice, beverage, spread, and jelly labels and Website violate California labeling law by including “no sugar added,” “all natural,” “no artificial flavors,” and “high in antioxidants” statements. Park v. Welch Foods, Inc., No. 12-6449 (N.D. Cal., order entered September 26, 2013). Agreeing that the complaint sounded in fraud and must comply with the heightened pleading standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9, the court noted that “Welch is after the who, what, where, when, and how surrounding the circumstances in which Plaintiffs were misled.” The company apparently argued that “portions of the complaint are generously and blindly appropriated from similar complaints filed in this district,” and that a 15-page limit would be appropriate. Still, “Welch wants to know specifically…
Tag Archives natural
A California resident has filed a putative class action on behalf of statewide and nationwide classes alleging that Safeway, Inc. labels and promotes its Open Nature waffle products as “100% Natural” while using the synthetic chemical preservative, alternatively referred to as sodium acid pyrophosphate and disodium dihydrogen pyrophosphate, as an ingredient. Richards v. Safeway, Inc., No. 13-4317 (N.D. Cal., filed September 18, 2013). According to the plaintiff, the chemical “has various applications—from its use in leather treatment to remove iron stains on hides during processing, to stabilizing hydrogen peroxide solutions against reduction, to facilitating hair removal in hog slaughter, to feather removal from birds in poultry slaughter, to use in petroleum production.” According to the plaintiff, the ingredient is not listed on the front of the package with the other ingredients. Claiming that he relied on the company’s “100% Natural” claims in purchasing products for which he paid a premium, the…
A federal court in California has granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss filed by Dole Food Co. in a putative nationwide class action alleging that the company misbrands a number of its fruit products by making certain “all natural,” “fresh,” nutrient content, antioxidant, sugar-free, and health claims, as well as failing to disclose that the products contain artificial additives, chemical preservatives and other artificial ingredients. Brazil v. Dole Food Co., No. 12-1831 (N.D. Cal., order entered September 23, 2013). According to the court, the plaintiff has standing at this stage of the proceedings to bring claims as to products he did not purchase, ruling that he may proceed with “substantially similar claims based on both products he purchased and substantially similar products he did not purchase” on behalf of unnamed class members. The court dismissed with prejudice claims based on the company’s website statements because the…
On reconsideration, a federal court in California has dismissed a lawsuit against Chobani, Inc., in a putative class action alleging that its yogurt products are mislabeled because they include “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) as an ingredient and state that they have no added sugar and contain only “natural ingredients.” Kane v. Chobani, Inc., No. 12-2425 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered September 19, 2013). Details about the order the court reconsidered appear in Issue 491 of this Update. The court dismissed the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) claims without prejudice and gave the plaintiffs 21 days to file a third amended complaint. Claims for unjust enrichment and violation of the Song-Beverly and Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act were dismissed with prejudice. Essentially, the court found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue their UCL, FAL and CLRA claims because they failed to…
A second amended complaint has been filed in a putative nationwide class action alleging that The Hain Celestial Group’s food and beverage product labels render their products misbranded and further mislead consumers because they use the terms “No Trans Fat,” “Evaporated Cane Juice” or “All Natural” in violation of state law. Smedt v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 12-3029 (N.D. Cal., filed August 30, 2013). Details about the court ruling dismissing the claims with leave to amend appear in Issue 495 of this Update. The plaintiff has omitted any claims that the company’s website misled consumers and has otherwise attempted to address the court’s concerns about ambiguous fraud allegations in her initial pleadings.
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss filed by J.M Smucker Co. in a putative class action alleging that it misleads consumers by labeling four of its Crisco® oil products as “All Natural” because they are purportedly made with genetically modified (GM) corn, canola and soy crops and because they are highly processed. Parker v. J.M. Smucker Co., No. 13-690 (N.D. Cal., order entered August 23, 2013). Finding that the amended complaint met the plausibility pleading standard, the court ruled that the plaintiff had standing to pursue claims as to products she had not purchased because they were sufficiently similar. In the court’s view, “They are all the same kind of product. They all have highly similar labels. Plaintiff alleges the same actionable conduct as to each of them.” The court also rejected the defendant’s contention that the claims were preempted in light of the Food…
A multidistrict litigation (MDL) court in New York has granted in part the motion to dismiss filed in a putative class action alleging that Frito-Lay North America and PepsiCo., its parent, mislead consumers by labeling various Tostitos®, SunChips® and Fritos Bean Dip® products as “all natural” when they contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In re Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. All Natural Litig., MDL No. 2413 (E.D.N.Y., order entered August 29, 2013). The court dismissed PepsiCo, Inc. from the litigation without prejudice, finding that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to support its liability. Among other matters, the court refused to dismiss the suit on the basis of (i) the primary jurisdiction doctrine (noting that the issues do not require specialized knowledge to resolve and that “the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] is unlikely to respond in a timely manner to any referral from this Court”), (ii) preemption (finding that FDA’s…
A federal court in California has dismissed putative nationwide class claims against The Hain Celestial Group alleging that the company’s food and beverage product labels and website mislead consumers because they (i) list the ingredient “Evaporated Cane Juice” or “Organic Evaporated Cane Sugar Juice,” (ii) are falsely labeled “All Natural” or “Only Natural,” and (iii) falsely claim to have “No Trans Fat” or other nutrient content claims. Smedt v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 12-3029 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered August 16, 2013). The court dismissed the statutory warranty claims with prejudice on the grounds that the food products are consumables and not covered under the state and federal laws and because food and beverage labels “do not constitute express warranties against a product defect.” The court dismissed the fraud-related claims with leave to amend within 15 days, finding that the amended complaint failed to “unambiguously specify the…
A federal court in California has issued an order granting the motion for preliminary approval of a class settlement in five lawsuits alleging that Naked Juice Co. misrepresented its beverages as “All Natural” and “Non-GMO.” Pappas v. Naked Juice Co. of Glendora, Inc., No. 11 8276 (C.D. Cal., order entered August 7, 2013). According to the court, the proposed settlement was reached after the defendant’s motion to dismiss was granted in part, extensive and contentious discovery was undertaken, and four mediation sessions occurred under the guidance of an experienced retired judge. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will pay $9 million into a settlement fund that will be used to make cash payments to class members and pay the costs of notice and settlement administration, attorney’s fees—not to exceed $3.1 million—and expenses, and incentive awards $2,500 each for four of the five named plaintiffs. Class members with purchase receipts…
A Florida resident has filed a putative statewide class action against Gruma Corp., alleging that the company falsely advertises its Mission® Restaurant Style Tortilla chip products as “all natural” when they contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Griffith v. Gruma Corp., No. 13-80791 (S.D. Fla., filed August 12, 2013). Alleging violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and contending that her claims “mirror the labeling, packaging, and advertising requirements mandated by federal regulations and laws,” the plaintiff claims that the products are misbranded and the labels are false and misleading because GMOs are not natural and she understood that product representation to mean that the chips contained no GMO ingredients. Alleging damages in excess of $5 million, the plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement, actual damages, attorney’s fees, costs, and interest.
