Peterson v. Conagra Foods Inc., No 13cv3158 (S.D. Cal.): In a putative class action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, as well as breach of express warranty, the plaintiff claimed that the defendants misrepresent their Chef Boyardee Mac & Cheese products as having “No MSG” and “No MSG Added” when in fact
Preemption
Supreme Court Holds That the FDCA Does Not Preclude Lanham Act Claims Amongst Competitors
By Breena M. Roos on
Posted in Preemption
The Supreme Court issued its opinion in Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. today. Under the Court’s unanimous ruling, a competitor may bring a claim under the federal Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125, against another competitor for false and misleading food labeling, and the FDA’s regulation of food labeling under the FDCA does…
Court Dismisses In Part for Lack of Injury-In-Fact
By Jacqueline E. Young on
Leonhart v. Nature’s Path Foods, No. 5:13cv492 (N.D. Cal.): The court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend in a putative class action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA claiming that several of cefendant’s products were misbranded with respect to a) ECJ, b) unapproved health or drug claims, c) “low sodium”…
Supreme Court Likely to Reverse Ninth Circuit in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola
By Katie O'Sullivan on
Posted in Preemption, Uncategorized
Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case. The transcript of the argument is available here. Pom brought this suit against Coca-Cola under the federal Lanham Act, alleging that Coca-Cola’s label (see page 7 of Pom’s petition for certiorari) of its “Pomegranate Blueberry” juice was deceptive and misleading to consumers when…
Milk and Preservative Labeling Claims Partially Dismissed
By Michael S. Young on
Posted in Dismissal, Preemption
Gitson v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 3:13-cv-01333 (N.D. Cal.): The court granted in part a motion to dismiss putative class action claims that the defendant’s products are misleadingly labeled in that they label some products as containing evaporated cane juice, label non-milk products as “milk,” and contain undisclosed preservatives. The court reaffirmed its view that…
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses Preemption Dismissal
By Charles Sipos on
Lilly v. Conagra Foods Inc., No. 12-55921 (9th Cir.): Plaintiff appealed dismissal of her putative class action complaint on federal preemption grounds. Plaintiff had alleged claims under California’s consumer protection and unfair competition laws, contending that the labeling of defendant’s sunflower seed products misleadingly provided a lower sodium content than the product contained. The panel…
Smart Balance Milk Labeling Suit Not Preempted
By Breena M. Roos on
Posted in Preemption
Koenig v. Boulder Brands, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-01186-ER (S.D.N.Y.): In a putative class action over “fat free” labeling on defendants’ Smart Balance milk products, the court held that nonbinding FDA opinions do not preempt state law claims. Plaintiffs alleged the “fat free” labeling of Smart Balance milk products infused with a blend of omega-3 fatty acids…
Regulatory Update Regarding Trans Fats
By Michael S. Young on
Posted in Preemption
On November 8, 2013, the FDA published a tentative determination that partially hydrogenated oils (PHO), which are the primary dietary source of industrially-produced trans fatty acids, are not generally recognized as safe (GRAS) for any use in food based on current scientific evidence. If this determination is finalized by the FDA, the result would be that PHO is considered a food additive that may be used in food only with prior FDA approval. The FDA cited scientific evidence that consumption of PHO significantly increases a number of health risks, principally heart disease.
Continue Reading Regulatory Update Regarding Trans Fats