Berni, et al. v. Barilla S.P.A., et al¸ No. 1:16-cv-4196 (E.D.N.Y.): Putative class action asserting a violation of New York GBL 349 and raising a claim of unjust enrichment, based on the claim that Defendants misleadingly market their “Whole Grain” and “Protein Plus” varieties of pasta by packaging them in boxes that are the

Guttmann v. Ole Mexican Foods, Inc., No. 3:14-cv-4845 (N.D. Cal.): The Court granted final approval of class settlement in this putative class action alleging a breach of express warranty claim and violations of California’s CLRA, UCL, and FAL, based on Defendant’s failure to disclose that its “Xtreme Wellness” line of tortillas contain partially-hydrogenated oil,

Henry v. Gerber Prods. Co., 3:15-cv-2201 (D. Ore.): The Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss without prejudice in this putative class action asserting violations of Oregon’s consumer protection statutes.  Plaintiffs claim that Defendant’s Graduate Puffs cereal snack products are misleading because the advertising highlights names and colorful pictures of fruits and vegetables that are

Bowring v. Sapporo U.S.A., Inc., No. 1:16-cv-1858 (E.D.N.Y.): Putative class action asserting violations of New York’s consumer protection statutes and claims of negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff alleges Defendant has misled consumers into believing its Sapporo brand beer is manufactured in and imported from Japan, when the beverage is brewed in the United States or Canada.  Complaint.

Brahler v. Kraft Heinz Foods Co.¸ No. 2:16-cv-849 (E.D. Cal.): Copycat putative class action asserting violations of California’s consumer protection statutes (CLRA, FAL, UCL) and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and raising claims for breach of warranty (express and implied), negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff alleges Defendant falsely advertises its grated parmesan cheese products as containing “100% parmesan cheese,” when in fact the product contains between seven to nine percent cellulose, a filler and anti-clumping agent derived from wood pulp.  Complaint.

Brower v. Campbell Soup Co., No. 3:16-cv-1005 (S.D. Cal.): Putative class action asserting violations of California’s UCL, CLRA, and FAL, and raising claims of breach of warranty (express and implied). Plaintiff alleges Defendant misleadingly labels and markets its “Healthy Request Chunky Grilled Chicken & Sausage Gumbo” soup product as being healthy, although the product contains artificial trans fat in the form of partially hydrogenated soybean oil.  Complaint.
Continue Reading New Filings For May 9, 2016

Tye v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 8:15-cv-1615 (C.D. Cal.): The Court issued a minute order granting-in-part Defendants’ motion to dismiss in this putative class action asserting violations of multiple states’ (California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania) consumer protection statutes, and raising claims of breaches of warranty, unjust enrichment, breach of implied contract, and breach of the

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. (“PETA”) et al. v. Whole Foods, Inc., No. 5:15-cv-4301 (N.D. Cal.): The Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss with prejudice, disposing of this putative class action asserting violations of California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, based on the allegation that Whole Foods’ representations that it has a

Reilly v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-23425 (S.D. Fla.): The Court denied in part Defendant’s motion to dismiss this putative class action asserting violations of Florida’s consumer protection statute and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff claims that Chipotle misrepresents that its products contain only non-GMO ingredients when, in fact, meat and dairy products sold at Chipotle

Campbell v. Chiquita Brands Inc., No.15cv2860 (C.D. Cal.): Putative class action alleging violations of California’s CLRA and UCL, as well as claims for common law fraud by concealment and unjust enrichment based on allegations that Defendant promoted and sold its bananas “as though all of them are farmed in an ecologically friendly and otherwise

Reynolds v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 4:14-cv-00381 (N.D. Fla.): The Court granted in part and denied in part Defendant’s motion to dismiss in this putative class action alleging violations of Florida’s DUTPA, breach of express and implied warranty statutes, as well as unjust enrichment based on claims that Defendant’s Great Value 100% Cranberry Pomegranate