Category Archives: fda

court rules that Pom Wonderful precludes claims that supplement is unsafe etc.

Posted on January 15, 2014 by rtushnet

ThermoLife Intern., LLC v. Gaspari Nutrition, Inc., No. CV–11–01056, 2014 WL 99017 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014) This dispute has been around for a while. The court’s introduction gives you a sense of the case: “The briefs and statements of … Continue reading →

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

FDA declines to define "natural," again

Posted on January 13, 2014 by rtushnet

FDA letter.  Discussion at Seller Beware Blog. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

Bumble Bee pushes the envelope, finds lawsuit inside

Posted on January 7, 2014 by rtushnet

Ogden v. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC, No. 12-CV-01828, 2014 WL 27527 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 2, 2014) I’m trying to do less food claim blogging, but I noted this case because of the summary judgment submissions, which contain interesting evidence about … Continue reading →

Posted in california, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing | Leave a comment

soy and almond milk couldn’t deceive reasonable consumers

Posted on December 16, 2013 by rtushnet

Ang v. Whitewave Foods Co., No. 13-cv-1953, 2013 WL 6492353 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2013) Plaintiffs sued over defendants’ Silk and Horizon products. The Silk products are plant-based beverages, including Silk Vanilla Soymilk, Silk Almond Milk, and Silk Coconut Milk.  … Continue reading →

Posted in california, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

Learned intermediary doctrine doesn’t bar claim at pleading stage

Posted on December 9, 2013 by rtushnet

Saavedra v. Eli Lilly and Co., 2013 WL 6345442, No. 2:12–cv–9366 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2013) Plaintiffs brought a putative class action under the consumer protection laws of California, Massachusetts, Missouri, and New York, and Saavedra also brought individual causes … Continue reading →

Posted in class actions, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption, standing | Leave a comment

Retailer’s California claims against supplier proceed

Posted on November 22, 2013 by rtushnet

TRC & Associates v. NuScience Corp., 2013 WL 6073004, No. 2:13–cv–6903 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2013) TRC, a supplement retailer, sued NuScience and Lumina based on their sales to TRC of a dietary supplement, Cellfood.  TRC alleged that defendants misrepresented … Continue reading →

Posted in california, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption, standing | Leave a comment

"All Natural" too undefined to be the basis of a claim

Posted on October 29, 2013 by rtushnet

Pelayo v. Nestle USA, Inc., 2013 WL 5764644, No. CV 13–5213 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2013) Pelayo sued Nestle alleging claims about 13 Nestle stuffed pasta products using the term “All Natural” on the labeling while containing synthetic xanthan gum … Continue reading →

Posted in california, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

The milk of human lawsuits

Posted on October 9, 2013 by rtushnet

Gitson v.Trader Joe’s Company, No. 13–cv–01333, 2013 WL 5513711 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2013)   Plaintiffs sued over “evaporated cane juice” and got basically the result in Wallaby, previously summarized.  They also alleged that certain soy milk products were labeled … Continue reading →

Posted in california, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

sugar by any other name unlawful, but not misleading

Posted on October 9, 2013 by rtushnet

Morgan v. Wallaby Yogurt Company, Inc., No. 13–cv–00296, 2013 WL 5514563 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2013) Another “evaporated cane juice” claim, here for yogurt that used that term in its ingredients list instead of “sugar” or “dried cane syrup.”  The … Continue reading →

Posted in california, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

another evaporated cane juice plaintiff gets to proceed

Posted on October 7, 2013 by rtushnet

Werdebaugh v. Blue Diamond Growers, No. 12–CV–02724, 2013 WL 5487236 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 2, 2013) The usual California claims, this time directed at Blue Diamond’s almond milk products and snack foods, which allegedly falsely claimed to be “All Natural” despite … Continue reading →

Posted in california, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption, standing | Leave a comment