- On December 8, 2020, United States District Court Northern District of California William H. Orrick ruled on Big Heart Pet Brands, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint and held that plaintiff’s amended complaint against the dog food manufacturer satisfies that standards for standing and can go forward.
- In the amended complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the Defendant falsely markets its Grain Free Easy to Digest Salmon Sweet Potato & Pumpkin Recipe Dog Food as “Grain Free,” “No Corn,” and “No Soy Protein” even though independent testing confirmed that the product contains significant amounts of both corn and soy.
- In response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss, Judge Orrick concluded that the plaintiff had standing to pursue the case, as she relied on the labeling of the dog food and its assurance that it contained no grain, corn, or soy, and would not have bought the food if she would have known that it was false. In its motion, Defendant argued that the amended complaint provides a report that shows the bag of food tests was not the one purchased by the plaintiff; however, Judge Orrick found that this fact did not impact the plaintiff’s standing at the motion to dismiss stage, as it is enough to allege that an example of the dog food contains grain, corn, or soy.
- Judge Orrick also rejected Defendant’s argument that the case must be dismissed because there are alternative possible explanations for the tested bag to contain grain, corn, or soy. In its motion to dismiss, Defendant stated that one alternative explanation for plaintiff’s allegations is that the product she purchased did not actually contain corn, or soy protein, and instead one sample bag, not purchased by her, may have inadvertently contained corn and soy DNA due to possible cross-contamination. However, Judge Orrick noted that a possible alternative explanation does not destroy the plausibility of plaintiff’s claims. Judge Orrick also stated that other courts have permitted consumer claims in nationwide class actions regarding product mislabeling to move forward based on limited testing, including a single test on a single sample of the product at issue. We will continue to monitor any developments.