Food for Thought is a review of significant court decisions affecting the food, beverage, dietary supplements and personal care products industry. Although many cases in this edition focus on class certification, others relate to summary judgment.
Florida District Court Rejects Motion to Strike But Allows Pre-Certification Standing Challenge in Snack Food Labeling Case
Bohlke v. Shearer’s Foods, LLC, No. 9:14-CV-80727, 2015 WL 249418
(S.D. Fla. Jan. 20, 2015)
Before class certification hearings occur in the Southern District of Florida, defendants may not challenge plaintiff’s class allegations via Rule 12(f) motions to strike but may challenge plaintiff’s standing via motions to dismiss. Continue reading »
Sweet Ending for Plaintiffs in Food Labeling Class Action Against Ghirardelli
Miller v. Ghirardelli Chocolate Co., No. 12-cv-04936-LB, 2015 WL 758094 (N.D. Cal. Feb 20, 2015)
A California district court certified a Rule 23(b)(3) food labeling class action against chocolatier Ghirardelli and approved a proposed settlement. The genesis of plaintiffs’ claim is that defendant mislabeled its “White Chips” and other products in a way that would mislead consumers into believing that the products contained white chocolate. Plaintiffs also asserted a claim that the “all natural” label was improper because the products contained “genetically modified, hormone-treated . . . or chemically extracted ingredients.” As part of the settlement, Ghirardelli agreed to pay $5.25 million into a common fund and agreed to effect certain labeling changes to all products at issue for a period of three years. The named plaintiffs would each receive a $5,000 incentive payment. Other class members would receive between $0.75 and $1.50 depending on the products purchased. Class counsel would receive over $1.5 million in attorney’s fees and approximately $87,000 in costs. Continue reading »
Partial Class Certification of “100% Natural” Cooking Oil Consolidated Action Affects 11 States
In re ConAgra Foods, 99 F.Supp. 3d 919 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2015)
In a consolidated case alleging deceptive and misleading labeling of cooking oil as “100% Natural” although it was made from genetically-modified organisms, the Central District of California granted in part and denied in part plaintiffs’ amended motion for class certification. The court denied plaintiffs' motion to certify an injunctive relief class for failure to show Article III standing. Plaintiffs’ motion to certify damages classes was granted as to classes for California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, and Texas. Continue reading »
California Court Grants Summary Judgment in Class Action Aimed at 100 Percent Juice & “No Sugar Added” Labels
Major v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., No. 5:12-CV-03067, 2015 WL 859491 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2015)
Plaintiff filed a putative class action alleging that Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc.’s 100 percent juice and “No Sugar Added” products were improperly labeled, which amounted to misbranding and deception, in violation of both California and federal law. Plaintiff sought to certify a statewide class action, appointing herself as the representative. Ocean Spray moved for partial summary judgment. The Northern District of California granted Ocean Spray’s motion for partial summary judgment and thereafter denied plaintiff’s motion for class certification as moot. Continue reading »
Florida District Court Denies Class Certification Based on Failure to Show Ascertainability
Mirabella v. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 12-62086-CIV-Zloch, 2015 WL 1812806 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 27, 2015)
In Mirabella, consumers sued the manufacturer of Redline Xtreme Energy Drink, alleging that the manufacturer concealed the dangerous side effects of the energy drink. Plaintiffs requested relief for (1) violations of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA); (2) unjust enrichment; (3) breach of implied warranty of merchantability; and (4) violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Plaintiffs sought to certify a nationwide class action on behalf of all U.S. citizens who purchased Redline Xtreme since October 2008. The Southern District of Florida denied class certification because the proposed class was not clearly ascertainable given the product’s low price (consumers would not keep receipts), the number of substantially similar products (consumers could not reliably declare class membership), and defendant did not have records identifying individual consumers. Continue reading »
Ninth Circuit Holds Cosmetic Labeling Claims Not Preempted by FDCA, Primary Jurisdiction Appropriately Invoked
Astiana v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., 783 F.3d 753, (9th Cir. April 10, 2015)
In April 2015, the Ninth Circuit held in a cosmetic labeling class action that the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) did not expressly preempt state causes of action predicated on federal cosmetics labeling laws and that the primary jurisdiction doctrine was appropriately invoked by the district court. In Astiana v. Hain Celestial Group, et al., a group of consumers brought a putative nationwide class action against cosmetic products manufacturers Hain Celestial Group and JASON Natural Products (Hain) alleging that the manufacturers’ use of the word “natural” on its products was false and misleading. Hain moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ state law claims asserting that they are preempted by the FDCA. Alternatively, Hain argued that the action should be stayed or dismissed under the primary jurisdiction doctrine. The Northern District granted the motion to dismiss and plaintiffs appealed. Judge McKeown wrote for the Ninth Circuit. Continue reading »
In April 2015, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Bennett in Sioux City, Iowa, sentenced Austin (Jack) DeCoster and his son Peter to three months in jail for their role in selling contaminated food across state lines. Their company, Quality Egg LLC, was sentenced to a $6.8 million fine and placed on probation for three years. Continue reading »
All About That Base: Claim Against Fat Loss Supplement Maker Fails For Lack of Ascertainability
Karhu v. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 621 Fed. App’x. 945 (11th Cir. June 9, 2015)
Adam Karhu bought a dietary supplement called VPX Meltdown Fat Incinerator (“Meltdown”) in reliance on advertising by Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (VPX) that Meltdown would result in fat loss. Concerned that...
