Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Food for Thought: Putative Class Action Against Yogurt Maker Revived by the Ninth Circuit with Directions to Stay the Proceedings in Light of Ongoing FDA Proceedings
March 24, 2016
Kane, et al v. Chobani, LLC, 645 Fed. Appx. 593 (9th Cir. 2016)

The Ninth Circuit revived a putative class action that alleged defendant Chobani deceptively and unlawfully labeled and sold its Greek yogurt products. Plaintiffs Katie Kane, Arianna Rosales, and Darla Booth, allege that defendant’s use of "natural" violated FDA regulations. Specifically, they alleged that the products labeled "all natural" contained artificial ingredients, flavorings, coloring and chemical preservatives, and that defendant deceptively and unlawfully used the term "evaporated cane juice" to describe the products’ added sugar without disclosing that the term is synonymous with the term "sugar." Thus, they contend that defendant misled customers into thinking the product contained less sugar than it allegedly did.

The district court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the third amended complaint. Citing the primary jurisdiction doctrine, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded for entry of an order staying the proceedings until such time as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completes its proceedings regarding the use of the terms "natural" and "evaporated cane juice" in food labeling. The Ninth Circuit, citing Astiana v. Hain Celestial Grp., 523 F. 3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2008), stated that the scope and permissible usage of the terms "natural" and "evaporated cane juice" in food products should be addressed by the regulatory agency with authority over the relevant industry rather than by the judicial branch.

The court supported its invocation of primary jurisdiction because the FDA both said it would address the terms, and had ongoing proceedings about them. Specifically, the court cited the FDA’s November 2015 request for comments regarding the use of the term "natural" in food product labeling and the FDA’s July 2015 letter indicating that it expects to issue final guidance on the term "evaporated cane juice" by the end of 2016. As a result, the court did not feel staying the proceedings would needlessly delay the action. However, in a footnote, the court noted that the duration of the stay remains within the discretion of the district court. The court further instructed that the district court’s exercise of its discretion should be informed by any events that rendered the FDA’s resolution of the terms "natural" and "evaporated cane juice" "illusory."
Related Practices
Mass Tort and Product Liability
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.