SPAM Class Action Says Advertising Claims Are Misleading

A class action lawsuit claims that SPAM Lite and SPAM 25% Less Sodium’s labeling misrepresents the canned meat products as being healthier than they actually are.

According to plaintiff Connie Chong, both SPAM products are marketed with health statements that entice consumers into purchasing the canned meat.

For example, the lower sodium version of SPAM is advertised with a “25% less sodium” claim while SPAM Lite is labeled with a “50% less fat, 25% less sodium, and 33% fewer calories” claim.

Further marketing statements are made on the SPAM website, claiming that SPAM Lite is “heavy on the flavor, light on the other stuff.”

These statements are allegedly misleading because the product’s nutrition values disqualify it from making health claims.

SPAM products reportedly contain 580 mg of sodium which is 480 mg over the threshold for making a health statement. Similarly, the SPAM Less Sodium and Lite products reportedly contain 8 g and 16 g of total fat, respectively. These amounts are reportedly above the 3 g threshold for making health claims.

“Plaintiff’s claim is essentially that, because defendant’s labels did not comply with state and/or federal requirements regarding the quantitative information, she could not see or did not understand the quantitative information, and therefore was misled by the unlawful packaging and purchased the product based thereon,” the SPAM class action lawsuit states.

Chong argues that she and other consumers would not have purchased the products if they knew that they contained a large amount of sodium and fat. Although the information was present on the SPAM nutrition facts, this data was allegedly not conspicuous in comparison to the other statements on the products.

“Defendant’s products are misbranded and unmarketable,” the SPAM class action argues. “Plaintiff was misled as a result of the misbranding and suffered economic injury because she purchased the products she otherwise would not have.”

SPAM manufacturer Hormel Foods allegedly knew that consumers like Chong would rely on front label statements when purchasing the canned meat. Chong claims that, therefore, the company knowingly misled consumers about their products.

“Defendant either knew or reasonably should have known that the claims on the labels of the SPAM Products were likely to mislead reasonable consumers,” the SPAM class action lawsuit argues.

Chong seeks to represent a Class of consumers who purchased one or more of the SPAM products since January 2016. She also seeks to represent a subclass of the same consumers from California.

On behalf of these consumers, Chong seeks injunctive relief in the form of labeling changes and monetary relief including restitution and disgorgement.

Other relief sought by the SPAM class action lawsuit includes compensatory damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Did you purchase SPAM Lite products thinking they were a healthier option? Share your experiences in the comment section below.

Chong and the proposed Class are represented by Juan Hong of the Law Office of Juan Hong.

The SPAM Labeling Class Action Lawsuit is Chong v. Hormel Foods Corp., et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-10944, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Scotts Morning Song Bird Food Settlement Checks In The Mail

Jury in Baby Powder Lawsuit Finds J&J Not To Blame

Pacific Foods Class Action Says Almondmilk Lacks Vanilla

Is Asbestos the Only Cause of Mesothelioma?