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 preservative
A consumer has filed a proposed class action against Hormel Foods Corp. alleging the company misrepresents its meat products as natural and free of preservatives despite containing synthetic or genetically modified ingredients, including cultured celery powder, baking powder and maltodextrin. Phelps v. Hormel Foods Corp., No. 16-62411 (S.D. Fla., Ft. Lauderdale Div., filed October 11, 2016). The lawsuit, focused on Hormel’s Natural Choice® line of products, echoes similar claims in a complaint filed by the Animal Legal Defense Fund in June 2016. Details on that complaint appear in Issue 610 of this Update. “The U.S. Department of Agriculture (‘USDA’) takes into account the level of processing in its policy on natural claims on food labeling,” the consumer complaint asserts. “The USDA allows such products to be labeled ‘natural’ when ‘(1) The product does not contain any artificial flavor or flavoring, coloring ingredient, or chemical preservative [], or any other artificial…
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,…
The Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) has reportedly filed a lawsuit against Hormel Foods challenging the company’s Natural Choice® brand of lunch meats and bacon, which it advertises as “100% Natural” and “All-Natural.” In a June 30, 2016, press release, an ALDF attorney argued that the Natural Choice® meats “come from the same pigs and the same giant, factory slaughterhouses that are used for the company’s canned Spam® products” and that the products are treated with “acid starter culture” to produce artificial preservatives. “Meat companies like Hormel have been quick to pounce on misconceptions about what ‘natural’ means,” Animal Legal Defense Fund Executive Director Stephen Wells was quoted as saying in the press release. “As an organization dedicated to transparency in animal agriculture and truth in meat advertising, the Animal Legal Defense Fund is standing up to vindicate the rights of deceived consumers and to prevent Hormel from wrongfully gaining…
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 California federal court has dismissed without leave to amend several claims in a lawsuit alleging that Whole Foods Market fraudulently and misleadingly labeled its 365 Everyday Value ketchup, oatmeal and chicken broth as containing “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) rather than “sugar.” Pratt v. Whole Food Mkt. Cal., Inc., No. 12-5652 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered September 30, 2015). The plaintiff alleged that because Whole Foods failed to use the most common name for the ingredient—as mandated by U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules—the products were misbranded and “cannot be legally sold, possessed, have no economic value, and are legally worthless.” The court first dismissed strict liability allegations, finding that the plaintiff sought to impose a requirement inconsistent with federal law. Turning to the plausibility of the plaintiff’s allegations, the court found his reliance claims contradictory because one claim required him to know nothing about ECJ while the…
