Judge Trims Orijen, Acana Cat Food Class Action Lawsuit

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.

A federal judge presiding over a Orijen, Acana pet food class action, has trimmed claims finding that the plaintiffs were not able to show that heavy metals inside the cat food are indeed harmful to animals.

The Orijen, Acana class action lawsuit was brought by a group of consumers who said they purchased food for their animals based on the marketed health benefits.

Those consumers said that defendant Champion Petfoods advertised its Acana, Orijen brand pet foods as healthy and sold them at a higher cost than other brands despite it containing BPA, cadmium, lead, and mercury.

The plaintiffs who filed the Acana class action said those ingredients were determined by third-party testing. The consumers claim that if they had known the pet food contained high levels of metals, they would not have purchased it for their cats.

The judge in the Champion Petfoods class action lawsuit found the plaintiffs failed to satisfy Illinois legal requirements mandating that a consumer contact the seller of a product if there is an issue prior to filing a lawsuit. For that reason, the judge dismissed the express warranty claim.

The judge offered to allow the plaintiffs to amend their Orijen cat food class action lawsuit. The unjust enrichment claim and common law fraud claims are still active in the cat food class action lawsuit.

The judge stated that the consumers who filed the Acana pet food class action did not go beyond speculation in making claims about heavy metals inside the food and whether or not it was harmful to cats eating the food.

The defendants claim that the heavy metals identified by third-party testing are naturally occurring in the pet food since BPA is prevalent in the environment already.

The dismissal of the claims involved statements from the judge that the EPA and FDA allow certain heavy metal limits inside human foods and some liquids and that the plaintiffs failed to show why dry pet food would be any different.

“Plaintiffs’ allegations that the mere presence of heavy metals and BPA in the Orijen and Acana brands renders these products ‘unsafe’ is mere speculation. In fact, plaintiffs acknowledge that the [Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] and other agencies have set specific standards for acceptable levels of these substances in certain liquids and in human food, and that level is not zero,” the judge’s opinion states. “Plaintiffs provide no reason to assume dry pet foods would be any different or that the levels reported in the data provided in … the complaint represent ‘unsafe’ levels.”

The plaintiffs are represented by Rebecca A. Peterson and Robert K. Shelquist of Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP and Katrina Carroll and Kyle A. Shamberg of Lite Depalma Greenberg LLC and Kevin A. Seely and Steven M. McKany of Robbins Arroyo LLP and Charles LaDuca and Katherine Van Dyck of Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca LLP and Glen Devalerio and Daryl Andrews of Andrews Devalerio LLP and Gustavo F. Bruckner and Samuel J. Adams of Pomerantz LLP.

The Orijen, Acana Cat Food Class Action Lawsuit is Deborah Leppert, et al. v. Champion Petfoods LLC, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-04347, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.