Whole Foods Asks Judge to Dismiss Animal Welfare ‘Sham’ Class Action

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Last Wednesday, Whole Foods Market Inc. filed a motion asking a California federal court to toss a class action lawsuit filed by PETA. The class action claimed that Whole Foods misled consumers with claims about their meat products and engaged in a “sham” animal welfare rating system. Whole Foods claims that the animal rights organization’s allegations against the grocer reflect concerns over the program, and not the grocer itself.

According to Whole Foods, plaintiffs Leah Williams and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. alleged that Global Animal Partnership’s auditing program for 5-Step Animal Welfare Rating System was “lax” and doesn’t ensure compliance on its standards for certification. The company also contends that the plaintiffs neglected to allege any wrongdoing or deceit on Whole Foods’ behalf for their display of GAP’s descriptions via the call-outs of their rating system.

Whole Foods asserted, “The only allegation asserted directly against Whole Foods is that Whole Foods advertises that its meat products are GAP certified under GAP’s progressive six-tiered certification program. That statement is plenty true and plaintiffs have not alleged any facts to prove otherwise.”

Additionally, Williams and PETA did not include any allegations of GAP rating system acts and omissions that could have held them liable, Whole Foods said. Nor did they allege that the company had a duty to disclose details of the monitoring system that GAP has in place.

The grocer argues, “Even assuming, arguendo, Whole Foods has a duty to disclose GAP’s auditing system (which it does not), plaintiffs contention fails because Whole Foods actually does disclose GAP’s audit system and the GAP standards for each step rating. As the [first amended complaint] acknowledges, Whole Foods discloses GAP’s audit process on its website, including every concern identified in the FAC.”

The motion to dismiss the Whole Foods class action lawsuit also expresses concern over William’s lack of being able to identify which meat products she purchased or which steps and her claims that she “saw the advertising signs, placards and/or napkins,” but says she would not have purchased the meat if “these advertisements had disclosed the truth.” The grocer further states, “Plaintiff Williams, however, admits that she ‘does not recall the specifics of the many advertisements she saw before she purchased the Meat Products.’”

The company continues, “Further, there is no allegation in the FAC that Williams ever went to Whole Foods’ website or viewed its annual report, or that any statement(s) on Whole Foods website or in its annual report(s) induced her to buy or pay a higher price for Whole Foods’ Meat Products.”

Whole Foods further alleges that the claims set forth in the class action lawsuit are preempted by the Meat and Poultry Acts and requested for the reasons set forth, that the court dismiss the lawsuit.

The original lawsuit was filed by Williams and PETA in September and referred to the animal welfare rating system as a “sham.”

The plaintiffs claim that the standards used in the rating system were barely above industry standards, and that such standards were not enforced by the GAP monitoring program. The plaintiffs allege they paid a premium for meat they thought was above industry standards and was geared toward animal welfare; however, they claim they suffered economic injury due to the loss of money they experienced as a result of Whole Foods’ deceptive practices.

PETA has claimed to have suffered injury due to “a ‘diversion of its resources and a frustration of its mission’ as a result of Whole Foods alleged misleading advertising because it has and continues to incur costs in educating the public and urging Whole Foods to stop its advertising.”

Plaintiffs are represented by Elaine T. Byszewski, Christopher R. Pitoun and Steve W. Berman of Hagens, Berman, Sobel & Shapiro LLP.

The Whole Foods Animal Welfare Class Action Lawsuit is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. and Leah Williams v. Whole Foods Market Inc., et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-04301, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.