The court focused on the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), which directs the USDA to establish an organic certification program for producers and handlers of agricultural products that have been produced using organic methods. “Brown ‘would not have purchased the products or would not have paid the price she paid,’ had she known the milk was not organic.” Despite that USDA designation, Brown alleged that only certain additives, not including DHA, may be added to organic food products and, therefore, the labeling and advertising of the milk as organic is false and misleading. In analyzing whether Brown’s lawsuit was viable, the court noted that the USDA database publicly lists Horizon Organic milk with DHA as currently certified organic by the USDA, and has been since 2013. Based upon this alleged misstatement, Brown claimed she repeatedly purchased the milk. Brown claimed that the milk’s label was misleading because it couldn’t really be organic if it contained DHA. She claims that before she bought the milk, she read and relied on the labels which clearly state that the milk is “organic” and that the milk contains DHA, short for Docosahexaenoic acid, which is alleged to be a fatty acid added to milk for “brain health.” The labels also bore the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) organic certification logo. Danone North America, LLC, plaintiff Brown alleged that she purchased Horizon Organic milk about once a week for a year. The federal district court for the Northern District of California recently dismissed a putative class action lawsuit, which alleged that Horizon Organic milk containing “DHA” violated California’s unlawful and unfair business practices laws.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |