A California federal court has denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging Barilla America Inc. misled consumers as to the source of its pasta products by marketing them as "Italy's #1 Brand of Pasta." Sinatro v. Barilla Am. Inc., No. 22-3460 (N.D. Cal., entered October 17, 2022). The court first held that the plaintiffs had standing to sue because the "allegations are sufficient to establish an economic injury for purposes of constitutional standing," but it found that the plaintiff lacked standing for injunctive relief. Turning to whether a reasonable consumer could be misled by Barilla's claims, the court was unpersuaded by Barilla's argument that "it is not misleading to invoke the company’s Italian roots 'through generalized representations of the brand as a whole.'” "Barilla asks the court to assume that consumers would solely perceive the Challenged Representation to mean that the products at issue are part of the Barilla brand,…
Tag Archives source
Two consumers have filed a putative class action alleging that Barilla America Inc. markets its pasta to incorrectly imply that the products are made in Italy. Sinatro v. Barilla Am. Inc., No. 22-3460 (N.D. Cal., filed June 11, 2022). The complaint asserts that consumers seek "authentic Italian-made pastas" because they "hold a certain prestige and [are] generally viewed as a higher quality product." The plaintiffs argue that Barilla's statement "Italy's #1 Brand of Pasta," which appears prominently on its product packaging, leads consumers to believe that the products are made in Italy rather than New York and Iowa. Further, the company's website describes it as "an Italian family-owned food company" and emphasizes that "Italians know the familiar Blue Box means quality, perfectly al dente pastas every time. That's why Barilla has been an Italian favorite for over 140 years, and continues to be the #1 pasta in Italy today." For alleged…
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has given final approval to a $7.5 million settlement in a lawsuit alleging that Godiva Chocolatier Inc.'s packaging misled consumers into believing all of its chocolate was produced in Belgium. Hesse v. Godiva Chocolatier Inc., No. 19-0972 (S.D.N.Y., order entered April 20, 2022). The approval dismisses concerns raised by the attorneys general of six states arguing that elements of the settlement were too favorable to Godiva. Their concerns included a $25 cap on claims with proof of purchase as well as a lack of notice about the settlement on Godiva's website, but the court found the cap to be reasonable and noted that Godiva sent 8.2 million initial emails and 7.7 million reminder emails to customers to provide notice of the settlement.
Two consumers allege that Hawaiian Host Candies, "synonymous with Hawaii," are made in Gardena, California. Toy v. Hawaiian Host Candies of L.A. Inc., No. 20-2191 (C.D. Cal., filed November 17, 2020). "Had Plaintiffs and other consumers known that the Hawaiian Host Products are not made in Hawaii, they would have paid significantly less for them, or would not have purchased them at all," the complaint alleges. The plaintiffs assert that the candy packaging intentionally misleads consumers with the candy name as well as statements such as "Hawai'i's Gift to the World," "Hawaiian Host products are made with aloha" and "Our classic confections reflect our deep connection to Hawai'i and are meant to be shared with others in the true spirit of Aloha." The packaging also includes the name of Hawaiian Host Inc. and a Honolulu address. As further evidence, the complaint cites the company's social media feeds, which share images of…
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will hold a public workshop to consider "Made in USA" product claims on September 26, 2019. In advance, FTC is requesting comments on several questions, including: (i) "What rationales underlie consumer preferences for products made in USA?"; (ii) "When consumers see product advertisements or labels stating or implying that products are 'Made in USA' or the equivalent, what amount of U.S. parts and labor do they assume are in the products?"; and (iii) "Do firms that advertise their products as 'Made in USA' charge higher prices than their competitors whose products are not advertised in this way?"
