"The primary ingredient in nearly all popular beverages including coffee, tea, soda, juice and sports drinks is water. However, the line of attack is similar to that deployed in the high-profile POM v Coke lawsuit, in which POM Wonderful accused Coca-Cola of misleading shoppers by marketing a juice comprised almost entirely of apple and grape juice as a ‘Pomegranate Blueberry flavored blend of 5 juices’ (the juice contained just 0.3% pomegranate juice and 0.2% blueberry juice).īlue Diamond told us that the primary ingredient in most leading beverages - from cow's milk to soy milk and almond milk - was water: " At Blue Diamond, we’re proud to deliver Almond Breeze to a very loyal and growing base of customers seeking alternatives to dairy and soymilk. Phrases such as ‘Discover the tempting taste of almonds’ coupled with multiple pictures of almonds on the packaging also reinforces the notion that the almond milks are mostly made from almonds, they argue.įocusing on the small amount of almonds in almond milk is a new line of attack for plaintiff’s attorneys in the US, who have historically targeted almond milk companies for using the term ‘milk’ to describe a non-dairy beverage, or ‘evaporated cane juice’ to describe sugar. The lawsuits do not state the exact percentage of almonds a reasonable consumer might expect to see in a commercial almond milk product, although they note that “ upon an extensive review of the recipes for almond milk on the internet, the vast majority of the recipes call for one part almond and three or four parts water." The plaintiffs allege the pair falsely portray the best-selling brands as being made primarily from almonds, when they allegedly contain only 2% almonds and are mostly made from water, sugar, and "v arious types of thickening agents”. The case – which consolidates two separate class action lawsuits vs WhiteWave Foods and Blue Diamond – relates to the way they market two leading brands of almond milk: Silk and Almond Breeze. Top almond milk brands are mostly water, sugar and thickeners, claim plaintiffs However, he did find that the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged causes of action under New York’s General Business Law § 349 and California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL).Īs for damages, he said: “ Because it is not necessary to resolve at this stage of the litigation whether Plaintiffs can seek damages under the UCL in a class action context, the Court need not address this issue.” Accordingly, this court dismisses the plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief.” ![]() Because they do not have individual standing, they also do not have standing on behalf of putative New York and California classes. He added: “ Plaintiffs do not have standing to seek injunctive relief because they have not alleged that they will purchase defendants' almond milk labeled products in the future. to get the defendants to change their labels – the plaintiffs must demonstrate a likelihood of future injury, but had failed to do so. In an Oct 21 order granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ bids to dismiss the case, US district judge Victor Marrero said that in order to seek injunctive relief – ie.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |