Thursday, February 22, 2024

Candy (However Not Too Sugary) Victory: Court docket Dismisses Lawsuit Over Sprout Meals Child Meals Labeling


Decide Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California just lately dismissed a putative class motion alleging that Sprout Meals’s dietary claims on its child and toddler meals labels misled customers into believing that the merchandise present bodily well being advantages.  Of their grievance, plaintiffs alleged that the merchandise are “dangerous each nutritionally and developmentally” resulting from allegedly excessive ranges of free sugars. In rejecting these claims, the Court docket discovered that plaintiffs’ allegations have been primarily based on speculative analysis findings and hypothetical situations, which didn’t adequately allege that defendant’s merchandise are per se dangerous.  Davidson v. Sprout Meals Inc., No. 22-cv-01050-RS (N.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2022).

Pointing to statements equivalent to “3g of Protein, 4g of Fiber and 300mg Omega-3 from Chia ALA” and different “nutrient content material claims”, plaintiffs alleged that the merchandise’ promoting talk well being advantages for creating kids.  Utilizing this interpretation as a springboard, Plaintiffs alleged that the merchandise’ promoting is fake and deceptive as a result of the merchandise comprise excessive quantities of free sugars and are saved in pouches, which plaintiffs allege could also be dangerous to creating kids.

In dismissing these claims, the Court docket discovered that plaintiffs failed to explain “at what level ‘excessive’ sugar content material crosses into dangerous ranges (and even why, specifically, these sugar ranges are dangerous).” And for his or her allegations that pouched meals could also be unhealthy, plaintiffs relied on speculative analysis findings – for instance, that pouches “could result in long run well being dangers” or could also be dangerous if overly relied on by mother and father. Plaintiffs additionally didn’t allege why the purported dangers outweighed any potential advantages of the merchandise, equivalent to offering protein or fiber to customers. Noting {that a} California Court docket of Attraction has cautioned in opposition to permitting lawsuits to go ahead that “depend on inferential leaps and which might in the end place nearly any commercial in truth touting a product’s attributes at subject for litigation,” the Court docket discovered plaintiffs did not plausibly allege that the product labels right here have been false or deceptive.

The plaintiffs’ bar is extensively concentrating on well being claims, together with claims that meals and different items could pose well being dangers as a result of they allegedly comprise sure substances or contaminants.  This case serves as a useful reminder that it’s usually the dose that makes the poison, and it’s not sufficient for plaintiffs to allege the mere presence of a substance, and speculative potential well being dangers which will end result, to state a declare.

***

Wish to discuss promoting? We welcome your questions, concepts, and ideas on our posts. Electronic mail or name us at bvinti@proskauer.com /212-969-3249

Related Articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

0FansLike
3,912FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -

Latest Articles