![]() Neither lawsuit involved complaints about the use of formaldehyde in Naked products. However, the complaint asserts that the labeling leads customers to believe it contains less sugar than other drinks, which it says is far from true.Īs for taglines like "only the best ingredients" and "just the healthiest fruits and vegetables," CSPI says Naked Juice is made predominantly of "cheap, nutrient-poor" juices like orange and apple juice. It's labeled with "no sugar added," which is true. The class action is requesting that PepsiCo change its marketing practices and award damages to people who have bought the products in question.ĬSPI points to Naked’s Pomegranate Blueberry juice as an example. But again, that lawsuit was a dispute about the use of terms such as "no sugar added" and "only the best ingredients" on the labels of Naked brand products, not about Naked products' supposedly containing dangerous or harmful ingredients:Ĭonsumer advocacy group the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) claims that statements like "no sugar added" and "only the best ingredients" lead customers to believe that Naked Juice is healthier than it really is. Under the deal the consumer plaintiffs lodged with the federal court, Naked Juice will continue to deny the allegations that its product labels were misleading or false but agreed shell out $9 million for a settlement fund and to redesign the labels to either eliminate or modify the representations at issue.Ī similar lawsuit was settled in February 2017. ![]() has agreed to shell out $9 million to settle a consolidated putative class action in California alleging that it falsely advertised some of its juice and smoothie products as "all natural" and non-genetically modified. The parties settled the case, with PepsiCo agreeing to a $9 million aggregate payout to consumers who had purchased Naked Juice products during a specified time period: Plaintiffs further allege that certain of the ingredients in the products were made from genetically modified plants or organisms in contrast to Defendant’s representations that the products were “non-GMO,” and that Defendant did not adequately disclose that the Products were made from concentrate. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s product labels are false and likely to deceive reasonable consumers because they contain unnatural and synthetic non-juice ingredients, including ascorbic acid, beta carotene, biotin, choline biturtrate, cyanocobalamin, D-calcium panthothenate, Fibersol®-2, niacinamide, pyridoxine hydrochloride, among other ingredients. ![]() In March 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“CAC”) alleging that Defendant, among other things, falsely marketed, manufactured and sold the Products as “All Natural,” “100% Juice,” “All Natural Fruit,” “From Concentrate,” and/or “non-GMO”. The former complaint did not mention formaldehyde at all and was not about Naked products supposedly containing dangerous or harmful ingredients it addressed Naked's use of allegedly deceptive product labeling terms, as described in the case's settlement documents: Based on the $9 million sum cited above, Underwood was likely referring to a class action lawsuit settled in July 2013, although multiple similar lawsuits have been filed, including another one that was settled out of court on 21 February 2017.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |