Our weekly roundup aims to keep our readers up to date on recent notable rulings in the food & consumer packaged goods space.

  • Kristie Brownell v. Starbucks Coffee Co., No. 5:22-cv-01199-FJS-ATB (N.D.N.Y. – July 12, 2023): The Northern District of New York granted dismissal of a putative class action alleging defendant marketed and labeled its coffee beans as being made entirely with Arabica coffee beans when lab testing revealed elevated potassium levels. The court held that plaintiff’s claim failed, stating that a reasonable consumer would not be misled by the challenged labeling statements and would not see “100% Arabica Coffee” and take it to mean that the product was nothing but coffee beans without any vitamins or minerals added. The plaintiff failed to provide any proof that the products had undergone any testing to support the elevated potassium claims. Further, the court found that the descriptor “Arabica” indicates only the plant from which the coffee was harvested. Opinion linked here.
  • Caryn Ash v. PSP Distribution, LLC, et al., No. 2019 CH-13116 (Ill. App. Ct. – June 12, 2023): An Illinois state appeals court affirmed dismissal of a putative class action alleging defendant misled the public by including whole flaxseed in its canned cat food when “ground flaxseed” was listed as an ingredient on the product’s web page. The panel found that no reasonable consumer would consider the disclosure of “ground flaxseed” to imply the absence of other forms of flaxseed. Indeed, the plaintiff made claims that whole flaxseed was detrimental to the health of cats yet lacked any support or evidence for that statement. Nor did the plaintiff successfully show that the inclusion of one form of flaxseed therefore excluded other forms. The court found that, even under the expanded protection of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, plaintiff’s allegations failed to support her assertion that the flaxseed distinction would be material to a reasonable consumer’s purchasing decision. Opinion linked here.
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of David T. Biderman David T. Biderman

David Biderman, a partner in Perkins Coie’s San Francisco and Los Angeles offices, focuses his practice on mass tort litigation and consumer class actions. He heads the firm’s Mass Tort and Consumer Litigation group. He has represented a wide variety of companies in…

David Biderman, a partner in Perkins Coie’s San Francisco and Los Angeles offices, focuses his practice on mass tort litigation and consumer class actions. He heads the firm’s Mass Tort and Consumer Litigation group. He has represented a wide variety of companies in state and federal courts in California for 30 years.

On consumer class actions, David represents packaged food companies, coffee companies, dairy companies, footwear companies and others whose nutritional or health claims have been challenged. He also has represented search engines and other online companies. He has a record of favorable results for clients. He successfully tried a major consumer fraud class action on behalf of one of the world’s major search engines in a case involving online gambling advertisements. For that same client, he negotiated a favorable settlement of a class action challenging its online advertising pricing. He represented a major coffee retailer in defeating a class action on standing grounds. He also has litigated pre-emption defenses arising out of food labeling and obtained a dismissal for a client whose nutritional statements were challenged.

For fifteen years, David managed the firm’s full-service product liability team responsible for defending over 1,000 toxic tort cases pending in Los Angeles and Northern California state courts. These cases entailed ongoing trial activity at various levels for several trials set each month. The highly experienced and well-coordinated team has handled thousands of asbestos toxic tort cases for a variety of clients, including FORTUNE 500 companies from such industries as consumer products, aerospace manufacturing, household goods, dry cleaning and industries that generate electromagnetic fields, such as electric utilities and operators of wireless communications systems.

Photo of Tommy Tobin Tommy Tobin

Thomas Tobin’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and class action matters involving statutory, constitutional, and regulatory issues in a range of industries, including food and beverage, consumer packaged goods, and cannabis. In the food and beverage sector, Tommy has experience defending false…

Thomas Tobin’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and class action matters involving statutory, constitutional, and regulatory issues in a range of industries, including food and beverage, consumer packaged goods, and cannabis. In the food and beverage sector, Tommy has experience defending false advertising claims and consumer protection claims for well-known international corporations.