FDA Compliant Food Labeling Withstands Claim
The use of fruit images and names on food labeling, in accordance with FDA regulations, is not misleading. On September 4th, a federal judge in California confirmed that depictions of fruit and the use of fruit names on food labeling are not representations of the fruit content of the product and are not misleading. The court dismissed a suit brought by plaintiffs Mark and Susan McKinnis against Sunny Delight Beverages Co. alleging that the use of fruit names and images in the marketing and labeling of the products led them to believe the products contained more fruit juice than they do. Sunny Delight, represented by Frost Brown Todd LLC, moved to dismiss the complaint.
The court soundly rejected plaintiffs’ argument, noting that the use of fruit images and names in association with the juice drink products was specifically authorized by the FDA and that the very labels about which the McKinnisses complained disclosed the fruit juice content of the product. The court expressly held, “the depiction of fruit on a product label is not a specific affirmation that a product contains a particular amount of fruit. In fact, the depiction of fruit on a product label is not a specific affirmation that a product contains "any fruit at all.” Ultimately, the court held no reasonable consumer could be misled by the labeling.
“Where a consumer can readily and accurately determine the composition and nutritional value of a product (here, by reading the front and back of the label), no reasonable consumer would be misled or deceived by depictions of fruit on a label.” Not only did the court dismiss all of plaintiffs’ claims, it denied the plaintiffs any ability to amend their complaint, stating any amendments would be futile because the underlying facts simply do not support a viable legal claim.
These same plaintiffs have filed virtually identical suits against a number of other food producers, all of which are facing similar motions to dismiss. This opinion increases the likelihood that those suits will also be dismissed, and perhaps, will discourage the plaintiffs’ bar from bringing such frivolous suits in the future. From the point of view of a company marketing food products, this decision reinforces the value of compliance with FDA regulations and other nutritional disclosures as a means to defeat consumer claims of misleading advertising and labeling.
