In re Horizon Organic Milk Plus DHA Omega-3 Marketing and Sales Practice Litigation, No. 1:12-md-2324 (S.D. Fla.): After conducting a fairness hearing, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of class action settlement and dismissing this consolidated class action alleging violations of multiple states’ consumer protection statutes, based on 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 in part and denied in part Defendant’s motion to dismiss in this putative class action asserting violations of California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, based on the allegation that Whole Foods’ representations that

Murphy v. Stonewall Kitchen LLC, No. 1522-CC00481 (St. Louis City Cir. Ct.): The Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss in this putative class action alleging violations of Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act (“MMPA”) and unjust enrichment based on claims that Defendant’s Vanilla Cupcake Mix is mislabeled as “all natural” when it contains synthetic ingredients such

Magier v. Trader Joes Co. et al, No. 1:16-cv-43 (S.D.N.Y.): Putative class action alleging that Defendant’s five-ounce canned tuna products weigh substantially less than labeled and are under-filled. Complaint.

Envtl. Research Ctr., Inc. v. Chosen Foods Inc., et al, No. RG16-798895 (Cal. Sup. Ct. – Alameda Cnty.): Proposition 65 action alleging that Defendants do not warn that their nutritional health products contain lead. Complaint.

Perea v. Tate’s Bake Shop, Inc., No. 16-36077196 (Fla. Cir. Ct. – Miami-Dade Cnty.): Action alleging that Defendant markets its cookie products as “All Natural” when they contain soy lecithin, which Plaintiff alleges is made with unnatural ingredients and contains pesticides. Complaint.

Continue Reading New Filings for January 25, 2016

Gates, et al. v. MusclePharm Corp., No. 3:15-cv-2870 (S.D. Cal.): Putative class action alleging negligent misrepresentation, violations of California’s consumer protection statutes (CLRA, UCL, and FAL), and violations of New York’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Plaintiffs claim that Defendant’s whey protein products are misleadingly packaged in large containers that contain a significant percentage (45%) of non-functional slack-fill. Complaint.

Gioia, et al. v. GNC Holdings Inc., No. 3:15-cv-2871 (S.D. Cal.): Putative class action alleging negligent misrepresentation, violations of California’s consumer protection statutes (CLRA, UCL, and FAL), and violations of New York’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Plaintiffs claim that Defendant’s whey protein products are misleadingly packaged in large containers that contain a significant percentage (30%) of non-functional slack-fill. Complaint.

Forsher v. The J.M. Smucker Co., No. 1:15-cv-7180 (E.D.N.Y): Putative class action alleging violations of California’s CLRA, FAL, and UCL, as well as violations of Ohio’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Consumer Sales Practices Act and other state law claims. Plaintiff claims that Defendant falsely represents that its Jif Natural Peanut Butter Spread is “natural,” when in fact it contains ingredients derived from bioengineered ingredients. Complaint.
Continue Reading New Filings for January 11, 2016

Kumar v. Salov North America Corp., No. 4:14-cv-02411 (N.D. Cal.): In this putative class action alleging claims arising under various California statutory and common laws, Plaintiff claims that Defendant falsely markets its extra virgin olive oil as “Imported from Italy” when in fact the olives Defendant uses in its products are not grown or

In re McCormick & Company, Inc., Pepper Products Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, MDL-2665 (J.P.M.L.): Courts have recently transferred a number of lawsuits related to Defendant’s alleged practice of slack-filling its ground black pepper tins to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation for consolidation. Transferred actions include: Theis v. McCormick & Co. Inc.

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

Ivie v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc. et al., No. 5:12-cv-2554 (N.D. Cal.): In this putative class action alleging claims of unjust enrichment as well as violations of California’s CLRA and UCL and the Magnuson-Moss Act, based on the claim that Defendants misleadingly label their gum, mints, or hard candies as “sugar free,” “sugarless,” or

Hofmann v. Fifth Generation, Inc., No. 3:14-cv-02569 (S.D. Cal.): In this putative class action alleging negligent misrepresentation and violations of California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA, based on claims that Defendant falsely calls its product “Tito’s Handmade Vodka” although the production process is highly mechanized, the Court denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Defendant’s bid for