Tag Archives New York

A consumer has filed a putative class action against Buffalo Trace Distillery, Inc., Old Charter Distillery Co. and Sazerac Co. alleging the companies misrepresent Old Charter Bourbon as aged for eight years before entering the market. Parker v. Buffalo Trace Distillery, Inc., No. 16-8986 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 18, 2016). The complaint argues that Old Charter was aged for eight years before a switch in manufacturing practices in 2014, and the bottle's labels were adjusted to remove the eight-year claim. Where the label once said "Aged 8 years," the label was changed to merely display an 8; in another spot on the label, the text reads, "gently matured for eight seasons." The plaintiff alleges negligent misrepresentation, fraud, breach of warranty, unjust enrichment and violations of New York and federal law.   Issue 624

A New York federal court has dismissed a consumer’s lawsuit alleging Mondelez International sells its Sour Patch Watermelon candy with unpermitted slack fill. Izquierdo v. Mondelez Int’l Inc., No. 16-4697 (S.D.N.Y., order entered October 26, 2016). The lead plaintiff had asserted that the box he purchased contained 28 pieces of candy but had enough space for 50 pieces. Additional details about the complaint appear in Issue 609 of this Update. After finding that the plaintiff did not have standing for an injunction, the court turned to the candy company’s arguments, dismissing its assertion that the accurate net weight released it from liability. Further, the court found it inappropriate to consider at the motion-to-dismiss stage whether a consumer could determine the contents of the package by shaking or squeezing it. The court was persuaded by Mondelez’s argument that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim because they did not clarify what…

A New York consumer has filed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (BWW) alleging the company misleads vegetarian customers into believing the restaurant chain offers vegetarian fare when certain offerings are actually cooked in beef tallow. Borenkoff v. Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc., No. 8532 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 2, 2016). The complaint asserts that BWW does not disclose its use of beef tallow in its menu descriptions, nutritional information or website, and further, the usage departs from the industry standard of non-beef cooking oil. The plaintiff seeks class certification, an injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, costs and attorney’s fees for an alleged violation of New York’s consumer-protection statute and unjust enrichment.   Issue 621

Representing a group of three consumers, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has filed a lawsuit against PepsiCo, Inc. alleging the company’s Naked line misleads consumers by naming and labeling its juices with foods “perceived by consumers to be highly nutritious, like kale,” but manufacturing the products without “the ingredient profile represented.” Lipkind v. PepsiCo, Inc., No. 16-5506 (E.D.N.Y., filed October 4, 2016). “Consumers are paying higher prices for the healthful and expensive ingredients advertised on Naked labels, such as berries, cherries, kale and other greens, and mango,” said CSPI Litigation Director Maia Kats in an October 4, 2016, press release. “But consumers are predominantly getting apple juice, or in the case of Kale Blazer, orange and apple juice. They’re not getting what they paid for.” The complaint asserts Naked products “predominantly consist of cheaper and less nutritious ingredients like apple juice” and targets the label’s “no…

A New York federal court has stayed a proposed class action alleging Kind LLC misleads consumers by describing its products as “all natural” and free of genetically modified organisms. In re Kind, No. 15-2645 (S.D.N.Y., order entered September 15, 2016). The court noted that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested comments on the use of the term “natural” in food labeling in November 2015 and closed the comment period in May 2016, suggesting that FDA is “prepared to address the core issues in this case.” The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims that Kind’s use of “healthy” on its labels was misleading following FDA’s determination that it would permit Kind to use the term as the agency considers redefining it. Details on that determination appear in Issue 604 of this Update.   Issue 618

In a lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) alleging failure to meet a deadline to set limits on perchlorate levels in drinking water, a New York federal court has issued an order adopting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) preferred language to admit the failure. Nat. Res. Def. Council v. EPA, No. 16-1251 (S.D.N.Y., order entered September 19, 2016). An EPA attorney reportedly admitted in court that the agency had missed the deadline of February 11, 2013, to set limits on perchlorate in drinking water after announcing its intention to propose regulations two years prior. NRDC and EPA then submitted proposed orders admitting the failure, and the court adopted EPA’s language without further discussion. See Law360, September 20, 2016. The court’s order finds that (i) EPA triggered a non-discretionary duty to propose a maximum contaminant level goal by February 11, 2013; (ii) EPA failed to propose that goal…

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 putative class action against Eight O’Clock Coffee, a subsidiary of Tata Global Beverages, alleging the company sells varieties of coffee in identical bags but fills them to different levels, amounting to impermissible slack-fill. Sorgenti v. Eight O’Clock Coffee Co., No. 16-6295 (S.D.N.Y., filed August 9, 2016). The complaint compares Eight O’Clock’s “iconic red flexible metallic bag” filled with 12 ounces of its basic coffee product to the “same sized bags” of its Explorations line—including 100% Colombian Peaks, Central Highlands and African Plains varieties—which contain 11 ounces of product. In addition, other product lines contain 11.5 ounces of product but are sold in the same red packaging, the plaintiff alleges. “As a consequence, consumers are being misled into believing that they are buying a larger volume of Eight O’Clock Coffee’s specialty coffee products than is actually contained in the bag,” the complaint asserts. “And more significantly,…

A New York federal court has dismissed a lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories Inc. alleging the company’s Similac® Advance® infant formula is sold as organic but contains ingredients impermissible in organic foods under U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations, finding the  claims preempted by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OPFA). Marentette v. Abbott Labs., No. 15-2837 (E.D.N.Y., order entered August 23, 2016). Both parties acknowledged that the infant formula was certified organic by Quality Assurance International, an organization accredited by USDA to certify organics. The court considered and found persuasive an Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision holding that challenges to an accredited certifying agent’s decision were preempted by the OFPA while challenges to the underlying facts were not. Agreeing with the circuit court’s reasoning, the court “finds that such a challenge is preempted because ‘[t]o the extent state law permits outside parties, including consumers, to interfere with or second…

The Topps Co. has filed a patent and trade-dress infringement lawsuit against Koko’s Confectionery & Novelty Inc. alleging that Koko’s Squeezy Squirt Pop copies some features of the Juicy Drop lollipop. Topps Co. v. Koko’s Confectionery & Novelty Inc., No. 16-0595 (S.D.N.Y., filed July 26, 2016). The complaint targets Squeezy Squirt Pop’s logo, font, bright and vivid colors set against a black background, flavor names and the appearance of the word “pop” as infringing trade dress. In addition, Topps asserts ownership of a patent on “a combination lollipop candy and flavored liquid dispenser”; a Squeezy Squirt Pop “combines a lollipop with a flavored liquid in a squeeze dispenser that is then squirted into a trough-shaped cavity in the lollipop itself so that it can then be licked off.” For alleged patent infringement, trade dress infringement and a violation of the Lanham Act, Topps seeks an injunction, an order recalling the…

Close