Notable Ruling Roundup - June 2024

Perkins Coie
Contact

Perkins Coie

Our notable ruling roundup aims to keep our readers up to date on recent rulings in the food & consumer packaged goods space.

Lindsay Finster v. Sephora USA Inc., No. 6:22-cv-01187 (N.D.N.Y. – March 15, 2024): The Northern District of New York dismissed a putative class action alleging that the marketing and labeling of defendant’s “Clean at Sephora” campaign leads consumers to believe that cosmetics bearing the representation did not contain any ingredients that were synthetic or connected to causing physical harm. The court concluded that plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that defendant materially misled consumers as nowhere on the label or in the marketing materials did defendant make any claim that the products are free of all synthetic or harmful ingredients. The court also concluded that plaintiff had failed to provide adequate pre-suit notice and failed to plead with adequate particularity under Rule 9(b). Opinion available here.

In re Trader Joe’s Company Dark Chocolate Litigation, No. 3:23-cv-00061-RBM-KSC (S.D. Cal. – March 27, 2024): The Southern District of California trimmed a putative class action alleging defendant’s dark chocolate products contain undisclosed lead, cadmium, and arsenic (the “heavy metals”). The court concluded that plaintiffs had plausibly alleged a reasonable consumer could be misled by the lack of any disclosure on the products indicating that they contain heavy metals when they contain the levels of heavy metals based on the allegations. The court noted that it must accept as true that the products actually contain undisclosed heavy metals. The court further reasoned that the determination of what level of heavy metals would be misleading to a reasonable consumer is a question not amenable to resolution on a motion to dismiss, writing that “[t]he court is not inclined to pick a threshold level of each Heavy Metal in each Product at which a reasonable consumer would be misled by the absence of a label disclosing its presence, particularly in ruling on a motion to dismiss.” Opinion available here.

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Perkins Coie

Written by:

Perkins Coie
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Perkins Coie on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide