Facts

Tricia Ogden filed a putative class action against Bumble Bee Foods LLC. Bumble Bee sells retail seafood products at groceries and retail stores throughout California and the nation.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Ogden regularly purchased Bumble Bee products, including Tuna Salad with Crackers, Solid White Albacore in Water, and King Oscar Sardines Mediterranean Style. She spent approximately $30 a month on Bumble Bee products over the four years leading up to this lawsuit.

Ogden contended that Bumble Bee made a variety of unlawful, false, and misleading statements about products in the products' labels and its websites. As a result, Bumble Bee misbranded its products.

Ogden contended that Bumble Bee labeled its products as containing Omega-3 fatty acids, claiming that its products were an "Excellent Source of Omega-3" and "Rich in Natural Omega-3." In turn, she paid a premium for the products, which she believed were a good source of Omega-3. Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration placed restrictions on when such claims may appear on a product's label. Ogden contended that Bumble Bee violated the FDA's restrictions because the FDA has not established a "Reference Daily Intake," or a "Daily Reference Value" for Omega-3, and the company's statements failed to specify what type of Omega-3 was in its products.

Ogden also contended that Bumble Bee made unlawful statements because they were not accompanied by a disclosure that its products contained high levels of fat or cholesterol, as required by the FDA. Moreover, Ogden contended that Bumble Bee made unlawful content claims regarding the presence of Vitamin A and Iron in its products. Finally, Ogden contended that Bumble Bee made various unlawful health claims on its website and the Solid White Albacore in Water product's label. Bumble Bee's label had a "heart symbol" which Ogden contended constituted an unlawful health claim.

Ogden filed causes of action that included Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Bumble Bee filed a motion for summary judgment on several grounds. Bumble Bee contended that Ogden lacked standing to bring her lawsuit under the UCL, FAL, and CLRA. Ogden also lacked standing to enforce the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Sherman Law. Moreover, Ogden was not entitled to restitution, disgorgement, or an injunction under the UCL, FAL, or CLRA. Bumble Bee also argued that Ogden was not entitled to relief under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty act or the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. In addition, Bumble Bee contended that Ogden was not entitled to bring a claim for unjust enrichment or quasi-contract under California law.

Result

U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh granted in part and denied in part Bumble Bee's motion for summary judgment. Judge Koh granted Bumble Bee's motion as to Ogden's UCL, FAL and CLRA claims based on Vitamin A, iron and health/drug statements; Ogden's claims for restitution and disgorgement; Ogden's Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claims; and Ogden's claim based on unjust enrichment or quasi contract. On the other hand, the judge denied Bumble Bee's motion as to Ogden's UCL, FAL and CLRA claims based on Omega-3 and additional front-of-package fat/cholesterol disclosures; Ogden's standing to enforce the FDCA and Sherman Law and Ogden's claim for injunctive relief.