Burt’s Bees natural labeling class action lawsuit overview:
- Who: Burt’s Bees was unable to obtain dismissal of a class action lawsuit filed against it by Perry Bruno.
- Why: Bruno claims Burt’s Bees misleadingly labels some of its products as “100% natural” despite them containing hydrogenated oils.
- Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.
A federal judge in California has ruled against Burt’s Bees’ request for the dismissal of a class action lawsuit accusing it of misleadingly labeling some of its products as “100% natural.”
Plaintiff Perry Bruno claims Burt’s Bees mislabels some of its lip cosmetics products as “100% natural,” arguing the representation is false since they allegedly contain hydrogenated oils, according to the Burt’s Bees class action.
Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett of the Central District of California determined Bruno’s amended complaint could proceed in part because “numerous courts in the Ninth Circuit have found it plausible that a reasonable consumer would understand similar labeling involving ‘natural’ to mean that a product does not contain any non-natural ingredients,” according to her order.
Further, Judge Garnett ruled that Burt’s Bees had not successfully argued that the lip cosmetics products in question were different enough.
“While any differences between the products which arise in discovery may affect class certification or summary judgment, (Bruno) has met his burden to plead substantial similarity at this stage,” the Burt’s Bees class action order states.
Judge dismisses Burt’s Bees’ argument that hydrogenation doesn’t affect all-natural labeling
Judge Barnett also dismissed Burt’s Bees’ argument that “hydrogenation does not render the relevant, otherwise natural, oils in defendant’s products ‘not-natural,” according to the order.
“This is a fact intensive inquiry inappropriate at the motion to dismiss stage,” the order reads.
Bruno wants to represent a nationwide class of consumers who have bought Burt’s Bees products allegedly improperly labeled as “100% natural” within four years of the filing of his original complaint, the Burt’s Bees class action states.
A consumer filed a separate class action lawsuit against Burt’s Bees in February over claims the company failed to disclose that its products contain dangerous “forever chemicals.”
In March, meanwhile, Burt’s Bees was named in a pair of class action lawsuits alleging the company sells products containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances despite labeling them as “100% natural.”
Have you purchased a Burt’s Bees lip cosmetics product that has been labeled as “100% natural”? Let us know in the comments!
The plaintiff is represented by Todd M. Friedman of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman PC.
The Burt’s Bees class action lawsuit is Bruno v. Burt’s Bees Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-02306, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
73 thoughts onBurt’s Bees class action over 100% natural labeling escapes dismissal
I have used Burt’s Bees chapstick for decades thinking they were all natural. My lips are always swollen and numb my tongue has sores. It is hard to open my mouth. I can barely taste anything. All I feel is pain while eating. My mouth and teeth hurt all the time, This is still occurring even after discontinuing. Please add me to the list.
I’ve used Burts Bees products for years and would like to be kept I informed by Class Actions.