Category: Reasonable Consumer

Subscribe to Reasonable Consumer RSS Feed

Court Denies Preemption Arguments But Dismisses Kellogg in Kashi Case

Eggnatz v. Kashi Co., No. 12cv21678 (S.D. Fla.) The court granted in part and denied in part defendant’s motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging that Kashi products were mislabeled as “all natural” despite containing GMOs.  The court rejected defendant’s preemption argument, holding that GMO-based claims are not preempted by FDA policy or regulations … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses Sunflower Seed Class Action Without Leave to Amend

Weiss v. The Kroger Co., No. 2:14cv03780 (N.D. Cal.): In a putative class action alleging claims under California’s CLRA, FAL, and UCL for false advertising of the sodium content of sunflower seeds by failing to count the sodium content in the shell coating, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss without leave to amend.  The … Continue Reading

100% Natural Tea Case Survives Dismissal

Von Slomski v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 8:13cv01757 (C.D. Cal.): The court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, as well as breach of express warranty, based on defendant’s representation that its teas are “100% Natural” when in fact they allegedly contain chemical … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses—For Now—“All Natural” Labeling Suit Against Diamond Foods

Surzyn v. Diamond Foods, Inc., No. 4:14-cv-00136 (N.D. Cal.):  A California federal judge dismissed without prejudice a proposed class action alleging the Diamond Foods deceptively labels its Kettle Brand TIAS! tortilla chips made with synthetic ingredients as “all natural.”  Plaintiff brought claims for negligent misrepresentation and for violations of California unfair competition and false advertising … Continue Reading

Court Certifies Injunctive Relief Class But Denies Certification of Damages Class

Lanovaz v. Twinings North America, Inc., No. 12cv2646 (N.D. Cal.):  In an action alleging claims under California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, based on representations on defendant’s tea products that they are a “Natural Source of Antioxidants,” the court granted in part and denied in part plaintiff’s motion for class certification.  The court ruled that Rule … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses Chobani “Natural” Lawsuit With Prejudice

Kane v. Chobani, No. 5:12cv2425 (N.D. Cal.):  The court dismissed the third amended complaint in this putative class action with prejudice.  Plaintiffs alleged claims under California consumer protection laws and the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, claiming that various of defendant’s products, including Chobani Greek Yogurt and Chobani Greek Yogurt Champions were misbranded as … Continue Reading

New Filings – January 08, 2014

Posner v. Hain Celestial Group, No. 13cv9310 (C.D. Cal.): Plaintiffs allege that defendants falsely market their teas as “100% natural” but contend that third-party testing reveals that defendant’s teas contain residue of pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals in excess of U.S. pollution standards. Complaint. Levin v. Hain Celestial Group, No. 13cv 9314 (C.D. Cal.): Plaintiffs … Continue Reading

Cereal Box Image of Strawberries in Milk Does Not Falsely Convey the Cereal Contains Strawberries

In Shaker v. Nature’s Path Food Co., No. 13cv1138 (C.D. Cal.), the court found plaintiffs’ allegations implausible where they alleged that the defendant’s “Optimum Cinnamon Blueberry Cereal” violated state consumer protection laws because the image on cereal boxes include a picture of the cereal in milk with fresh strawberries. Plaintiffs claimed that the strawberries falsely … Continue Reading

New Filings – December 9, 2013

Ibarrola v. Kind, LLC, No. 13-cv-50377 (N.D. Ill.): Plaintiff alleges that various of Kind’s snack products are misbranded because they list “evaporated cane juice” as an ingredient instead of sugar. The complaint alleges various claims under Illinois law on behalf of a putative nationwide class. Complaint. Alamilla v. The Hain Celestial Co., No. 13-cv-05595 (N.D. … Continue Reading

New Filings – November 12, 2013

Suarez v. Anheuser-Busch Cos. (Fla. Cir. Ct., 11th Jud. Circ.) (Miami-Dade County):  Plaintiffs allege that Anheuser-Busch misleads consumers to believe that Kirin beer is manufactured and imported from Japan, when in fact it is made in the U.S. of domestic ingredients – and that plaintiffs paid substantially more for Kirin under the belief that the … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses False Claim Case Against Weight Watchers

Burke v. Weight Watchers International Inc., No. 12cv6742 (D.N.J.): Plaintiff claimed that low calorie ice cream bars sold by Weight Watchers understated the number of calories in the products. The court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding that the complaint had failed to adequately plead that defendants violated any of the five methods authorized by … Continue Reading

New Filings – October 14, 2013

Richards v. Safeway, No. 13cv4317 (N.D. Cal.): Plaintiffs allege that frozen waffles labeled “100% Natural” contain an allegedly “synthetic” ingredient, sodium acid pyrophosphate. Complaint. Swearingen v. Attune Foods, No. 13cv4541 (N.D. Cal.): Plaintiffs allege that Attune’s chocolate bars, Erewhon crackers and cereals, and Uncle Sam’s cereals are “misbranded” because the labels list ECJ as an … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses as “Ridiculous” Plaintiffs’ Claims that Strawberry and Raspberry Newtons Contain Whole Fruit

Manchouck v. Mondelez International, dba Nabisco, No. 13cv2148 (N.D. Cal.): Plaintiffs claimed that Nabisco’s representations that Strawberry and Raspberry Newton cookies were “made with real fruit” violated California’s consumer protection statutes because the cookies were made with pureed strawberries and raspberries, rather than solid fruit. The court granted Nabisco’s motion to dismiss, with prejudice. The … Continue Reading

Court Denies Motion to Dismiss in Part Food Labeling Class Action Involving Heart Health and “Fresh” Claims

Ang v. Bimbo’s Bakeries, Inc., No. 13cv1196 (N.D. Cal.): In a case involving the labeling of Thomas’ English Muffins, Sara Lee bread, and various Entenmann products, the court denied the majority of defendant’s motion to dismiss. According to the court, the complaint adequately alleged particularity under Rule 9 and satisfied pleading requirements for injury and … Continue Reading