Pret A Manger Wants ‘Natural’ Class Action Tossed

Pret A Manger has filed a second motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging that the company’s food is not “natural” because it contains “synthetic ingredients” and soya, which is a genetically modified organism (GMO).

Plaintiff Skylar Cunningham claims that she paid a premium for the food and purchased more than she normally would have if she knew that Pret’s products contained GMOs.

In their motion to dismiss, Pret A Manger argues that the plaintiff does not allege that any testing was performed to verify that GMOs are contained in the products. The Pret A Manger motion to dismiss states that without testing or other support for her allegations, her claims are without merit.

“Indeed, other than claiming that some of these ingredients are listed on the packaging of certain unidentified Products…she does not allege any basis for her allegations,” the motion to dismiss argues.

In addition, Pret A Manger contends that the plaintiff does not state which products she purchased or if any of the challenged ingredients were in the food that she bought.

Also, the defendant argues that the Cunningham’s claims are not sufficient to prove standing for injunctive relief because she has not displayed any risk of future harm.

The Pret A Manger motion to dismiss states that the plaintiff would have to show that a reasonable customer would be deceived by the defendant’s statements.

“In light of the applicable regulatory framework, a reasonable consumer would not expect products labeled ‘natural’ to be completely devoid of soya or other commonly used ingredients that are allowed even in foods labeled ‘organic,’” the Pret A Manger motion to dismiss argues.

The motion to dismiss further states that the plaintiff’s claims for breach of express or implied warranty are meritless as the use of the word “natural” is not a warranty. The defendant notes that even if there was a warranty, it has not breached it by selling food that contains ingredients that are commonly used.

“Finally, and in the alternative, this action should be stayed under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, pending the FDA’s issuance of guidance regarding the definition of ‘natural,’” the Pret A Manger motion to dismiss argues.

Cunningham filed the Pret A Manger class action in March 2019, claiming that she looked at advertisements at Pret’s restaurants that labeled some of their food items as “natural.” 

The plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed in August, argues that “Reasonable consumers, including Plaintiff and Class Members, value natural products for important reasons, including the belief that they are safer and healthier than alternative products that are not represented as natural.”

Cunningham also argues in the second amended complaint that surveys and other market research shows that the word “natural” is deceiving to a reasonable consumer because one would believe that the term means that the goods are “free of synthetic ingredients and/or GMOs.”

The Pret A Manger class action also argues that consumers do not have the ability to test or verify whether a product is in fact natural, mainly when they purchase the item at the register.

“Consumers would not know the true nature of the ingredients merely by reading the ingredients label,” the plaintiff claims.

Did you buy food at Pret A Manger because you thought the products were made of natural ingredients?  Leave a comment below.

The plaintiff is represented by Jason P. Sultzer, Janine Pollack and Jeremy Francis of The Sultzer Law Group PC and Michael R. Reese and George V. Granade of Reese LLP.

The Pret A Manger Natural Class Action Lawsuit is Skylar Cunningham v. Pret A Manger Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-02322, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Pret A Manger Customers Near Settlement of Slack-Fill Wrap Class Action

Is There Asbestos in Baby Powder?

Taco Bell Class Action Says Drive Thru Violates ADA

What Is a Birth Injury?