This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Unfair Competition
Misbranding, False Advertising

Alex Ang and Kevin Avoy, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Whitewave Foods Co., Dean Foods Co., WWF Operating Co., Horizon Organic Dairy LLC

Published: Jan. 4, 2014 | Result Date: Dec. 10, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:13-cv-01953-SC Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

David P. Wilson

Ben F. Pierce Gore
(Pratt & Associates)


Defendant

Nathan M. Davis
(Pasich LLP)

Angela C. Agrusa
(DLA Piper LLP )


Facts

Alex Ang and Kevin Avoy filed a putative class action against Whitewave Foods Co., Dean Foods Co., Wwf Operating Co., and Horizon Organic Dairy LLC, alleging unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent practices in violation of the California Unfair Competition Law, misleading and deceptive advertising in violation of the California False Advertising Law, violation of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and restitution based on unjust enrichment/quasi-contract.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that defendants misbranded its products containing evaporated cane juice. The products included soy milk, almond milk, low-fat milk, and yogurt products. Plaintiffs contended that defendants should have used the terms "sugar" or "dried cane syrup" instead of using the term "evaporated cane juice." Plaintiffs also contended that defendants misbranded their plant-based products as "milk" when that term was defined as "a substance coming from lactating cows." Further, that the products were also mislabeled as yogurt because they contained evaporated cane juice.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground of res judicata. In the alternative, defendants argued that plaintiffs' claims were preempted by the Florida action that alleged the same claims and had since settled. Defendants also contended that plaintiffs' claims were implausible.

Result

The court found that res judicata barred plaintiffs' evaporated juice cane and yogurt claims, but no as to their "milk" claims. However, the court found plaintiffs' milk claims preempted, and even if they weren't, they were implausible. The court dismissed plaintiffs' claim with prejudice.


#101190

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390