Gitson v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 3:13-cv-1333 (N.D. Cal.):  The Court granted in part and denied in part Defendant’s third motion to dismiss this putative class action alleging that various Trader Joe’s products are misleading or misbranded. Defendant’s latest motion sought dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims relating to “soymilk” products. The Court found Plaintiff’s claims

Environmental Research Ctr. v. Athletic Greens (USA) Inc., No. RG15791200 (Cal. Sup. Ct. – Alameda Cnty.):  In this Proposition 65 action alleging that Defendant’s nutritional health products contain lead, Plaintiff moved for approval of settlement and for entry of consent judgment. The terms of the settlement require Defendant to place a Proposition 65 warning

Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, Inc., No. S216305 (Cal. Supreme Ct.): The California Supreme Court reversed an Appeals Court’s ruling that Plaintiff’s claims that Defendant’s herbs were misleadingly labeled “organic” were preempted by the Organic Foods Production Act (“OFPA”). The Court reasoned that while organic certification was a fully federally occupied field, state Courts

McMahon v. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC, No. 1:14-cv-3346 (N.D. Ill.): The Court denied a motion to dismiss this putative class action alleging that Defendant’s seafood and tuna products were labeled with unlawful Omega-3 nutrient content claims.  Declining to find the matter preempted by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, the Court held that the

Kassin v. Quality Nature, Inc., No. 514761/2015 (N.Y. Supreme Ct. – Kings Cnty.): Putative class action alleging that Defendant’s “Garcinia Cambogia” and “Hydroxycitric Acid” dietary supplements are labeled “100% Natural,” when in fact they contain GMOs and synthetic ingredients such as magnesium, malodextrin, calcium carbonate, and potassium chloride. Complaint.

Am. Chemistry Council v. Office

Mohamed v. Kellogg Co., No. 3:14-cv-02449 (S.D. Cal.): A federal judge granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings in this putative class action alleging that defendant labels its Gardenburger products “made with natural ingredients” and “real good ingredients” when they in fact contain synthetic ingredients such as

Nguyen v. Medora Holdings, LLC, No. 5:14-cv-00618 (N.D. Cal.): A court declined to certify declaratory and injunctive relief classes in this putative class action alleging that defendant’s popped corn chip products labeled “All Natural” are misleading because they contain GMOs. The court found that plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because there was no evidence

Kind Litigation: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered the consolidation of at least 11 proposed class actions accusing Kind LLC of falsely labeling its snack bars as “healthy” despite little nutrients and high saturated fat content to the Southern District of New York for pretrial proceedings. Order.

Steinberg v. Ateeco, Inc., No. 0:15-cv-60973 (S. D. Fla.):  A federal judge denied a motion to dismiss this putative class action alleging that Defendant’s Mrs. T’s Pierogies are mislabeled because they have improper serving sizes, understate the amount of calories and fat, and fail to provide the required disclosure regarding sodium content. Finding that

A recent decision by the Third Circuit in an auto defect case could have significant impact on the ‘predominance’ of claims analysis in food class actions. The Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s order granting certification of six statewide classes, and remanded for further hearings in this putative class action alleging that Volvo sold