![]() ![]() It appears now that this case is going to be separated, and the actions against Blue Diamond and Silk will proceed independently, perhaps in part based upon the fact that the complaint says that Silk uses allegedly similar false advertising practices on its other varieties of plant-based milk products.Įvidence will focus on consumer expectations, perhaps looking at the understanding of the average milk buyer, and if the average buyer of dairy milk is the same as the buyer of plant-based milk products. This refers to additional claims made on the Blue Diamond website.Īll of the allegations against Silk are fairly similar. Again, without drawing a conclusion, the complaint implies that the consumer will believe that a product must contain a much higher percentage of almonds than Blue Diamond is using in order to qualify as an almond-related heart-healthy food. The plaintiffs also discuss the statement that almonds are “heartfelt” heart-healthy foods. The complaint turns next to an objection to the description “made from,” which you would have to surmise that they find to imply that almonds constitute a more substantial portion of the ingredients however, that connection was never expressly alleged. ![]() The plaintiffs believe that this photograph will cause consumers to believe that a substantial percentage of ingredients for this product is almonds. There is no allegation of how many almonds you actually need to press in order to get even 2% of the container full of almond milk. What could be bit more troublesome to Blue Diamond, as the case winds its way down the road, is a graphic on the side of the carton which shows two outstretched hands, cupped together, and holding an overflowing supply of almonds. The “real almonds” claim is almost certainly literally true, but what can be found deceptive is consumers believe that it implies more than a small percentage. Close-ups of the packaging show that the label describes the product as “almond milk” and says that the product is made from “real almonds.” The complaint is full of familiar looking photographs of Almond Breeze half-gallon and individual sized containers. (They still have to prove that 2% number, by the way, but claim that UK packaging specifically identifies that 2% number.) I’m not suggesting I know that is what has been done here, but only that it makes it difficult to know what the claim is, exactly.) The real issue is this: if most almond milk “recipes” say that 35% of the ingredients should be almonds and these two brands are only using 2%, is there really harm to the consumer? This lawsuit is arguing that whatever percentage of almonds consumers are expecting, it presumably is way more than 2%. “Internet research,” to lawyers and courts, often conjures up the worst kind of sound bite-hunting. The Almond Breeze class action lawsuit also alleges that Blue Diamond’s use of the term “all natural” on the products violates federal regulations and California law because the artificial ingredient potassium citrate is present in the products.(They cite “extensive Internet research” in their lawsuit, which always should sound alarm bells. Specifically, he contends that the defendant’s use of the term “evaporated cane juice” violates: (a) the FDA’s definition of the term “juice” (b) the FDA’s requirements for identifying cane syrup on food labels and (c) the FDA’s blanket requirement that food must be referred to by their common or usual names and not by names “confusingly similar to the name of another food that is not reasonably encompassed within the same name.” Werdebaugh alleges in the Blue Diamond almond milk class action lawsuit, filed May 29, 2012, that Blue Diamond’s use of the term “evaporated cane juice” as an ingredient instead of sugar cane or cane syrup violates federal regulations and California law. ![]() The Court also finds that Plaintiff’s counsel has experience in prosecuting consumer fraud and warranty class actions,” Judge Koh wrote in her May 23 Order. Werdebaugh and the proposed class share the same claims and interest in obtaining relief, and he is vigorously pursuing relief on behalf of the proposed class. ![]() “The Court finds Werdebaugh to be an adequate class representative. Judge Koh previously denied a motion by Blue Diamond to dismiss the Almond Breeze class action lawsuit in October 2013. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |