Parkay ‘0 Calorie’ Spray Class Action Lawsuit Website Is Live

A website has been established as a landing page for a ConAgra Parkay spray class action lawsuit alleging false advertising claims.

Though the website is live, the settlement is not accepting claims at this time. A judge has yet to approve the settlement deal. Top Class Actions will provide information on how to file a claim as soon as the details are available.

The court has certified a Class of individuals who purchased Parkay spray products in California or Hawaii since Jan. 1, 2008. As a result, a website has been established to inform these Class Members about the class action lawsuit and any updates to the case.

Class Members will be impacted by the outcome of the case. If the plaintiffs succeed in their class action lawsuit or reach a settlement, Class Members will have the opportunity to collect a share of any resulting compensation. However, if the plaintiffs lose the case, Class Members will be barred from taking similar action against ConAgra for Parkay spray false advertising.

Class Members had until June 4, 2020 to exclude themselves from the Class. The Parkay spray class action lawsuit is set to go to trial on Nov. 2, 2020.

Plaintiffs in the ConAgra class action lawsuit argued that Parkay spray products are misleadingly labeled as containing “0 g Fat [Per Serving]” and “0 Calories [Per Serving].” These representations were allegedly misleading and do not accurately reflect the nutritional content of the products.

According to the Parkay spray class action lawsuit, the products also have an improperly small serving size of “1 spray [for cooking spray]” and “5 sprays [for topping].” These serving sizes allegedly violate regulations from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Together, these representations are misleading to consumers. In reality, reasonable consumers reportedly consume more of the Parkay spray than is indicated on the labeling. As a result, consumers reportedly consume both fat and calories despite the label representations that the products contain zero fat and zero calories.

Plaintiffs in the Parkay spray class action lawsuit contend that they were financially injured by ConAgra’s conduct because they were deceived into paying a higher price for the products.

If the products were labeled accurately, the plaintiffs and Class Members would have allegedly not purchased the products or would have paid significantly less for them.

Since the Parkay spray class action lawsuit was filed in 2013, there have been several setbacks and challenges.

ConAgra filed a motion to dismiss the claims in 2013, arguing that the Parkay spray class action claims were preempted by the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA).

However, in September 2013, U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar denied this motion to dismiss. According to the judge, the plaintiffs successfully provided enough information to allege that ConAgra flouted FDA regulations.

Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, there would be numerous setbacks following this victory.

In January 2015, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria denied the plaintiffs’ motion for Class certification. According to Judge Chhabria, the plaintiffs failed to show how Class Members from non-California states could be included in the proposed Class. However, the judge did give the plaintiffs the ability to seek certification again following discovery.

In December 2018, the case again returned to a motion to dismiss. U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick preserved claims surrounding fat and calorie content in the class action lawsuit but chose to dismiss other claims under non-California common law.

“After a denied motion to dismiss, a denied motion for class certification, a stay, the addition of seven named plaintiffs, and multiple changes to the legal landscape, this case returns to the motion to dismiss stage,” Judge Orrick noted.

In June 2019, Judge Orrick said he would likely not certify a nationwide Class of Parkay spray purchasers. However, the judge did reveal that he would likely certify a state Class. The next month, in July 2019, Judge Orrick followed through on his predictions when he certified several state Classes.

In addition to the Hawaii and California Class included in the Parkay spray class action lawsuit website, the judge also certified a Class of Indiana and Wyoming consumers. Subclasses for California, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois were also certified, according to the order for Class certification.

Did you purchase Parkay spray? Will you be eligible for the proposed settlement? Let us know in the comment section below.

Plaintiffs and the proposed Class is represented by Adam J. Gutride, Seth A. Safier, Anthony Patek, and Kristen Simplicio of Gutride Safier LLP and Ureka E. Idstrom of The Eureka Law Firm.

The ConAgra Parkay Spray False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Allen, et al. v. ConAgra Foods Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-01279, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Steaz Tea Deceives With Added Sugars Labeling: Class Action Lawsuit

Nothing Natural About McDonald’s Ice Cream Flavor, Class Action Lawsuit Claims

Ethicon Stapler Lawsuit Claims Device Caused Surgical Complications

How to Stop Harassing Telemarketers Calling From a Car Dealer