Thomas v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 5:12cv2908 (N.D. Cal.): The court granted in part and denied in part defendant’s motion to dismiss in a putative class action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA claiming that several of defendant’s products were misbranded and/or misleading with respect to a) nutrient content, b) antioxidant claims, c)
Primary Jurisdiction
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”…
Court Stays Evaporated Cane Juice Case on Primary Jurisdiction Grounds
By Jacqueline E. Young on
Posted in Primary Jurisdiction
Swearingen v. Santa Cruz Natural, Inc., 3:13cv04291 (N.D. Cal.): The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice in a putative class action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, CLRA, and a number of common law tort claims, alleging that defendant’s use of the term “organic evaporated cane juice” on its labels violates the FDCA. The court…
Bumble Bee Foods Wins Partial Summary Judgment in Omega-3 False Ad Class Action
By Breena M. Roos on
In Ogden v. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC, No. 12cv1828 (N.D. Cal.), the court heard a putative class action in which plaintiff alleged that a variety of Bumble Bee products contain false or misleading label statements, including that its products are a “good source” or “excellent source” of Omega-3 fatty acids and “rich in” Vitamin…
Evaporated Cane Juice Complaint Dismissed in Part
By Breena M. Roos on
Posted in Primary Jurisdiction
In Reilly v. Amy’s Kitchen, No. 13cv21525 (S.D. Fla.), plaintiff alleged a wide variety of defendant’s packaged food products violate Florida consumer protection laws because their labels disclose “evaporated cane juice even though ECJ is actually sugar, not juice.” The court ruled that plaintiff lacked standing to allege statutory violations based on products she…
Court Finds “Zero Impact” a Question for FDA
By Breena M. Roos on
Posted in Dismissal, Primary Jurisdiction
Watkins v. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 12cv9374 (C.D. Cal.): The court granted a motion to dismiss where plaintiffs allege that protein meal replacement bars sold under the “Zero Impact” label falsely suggest that the “zero” implies the products will have no impact, when in fact they “certainly have an impact on consumers’ carbohydrate, sugar…