Kraft Heinz False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit Dismissed

A federal judge dismissed a consumer’s false advertising lawsuit against Kraft Heinz, finding her pleadings failed to adequately state a case for fraud.

U.S. District Judge Michael M. Anello said that plaintiff Suzanne Alaei provided “almost no detail” in her pleadings about Kraft Heinz’s alleged misrepresentations, falling far short of the legal standards required to initiate a claim of fraud.

While Alaei made general allegations as to possible misrepresentation by Kraft Heinz in the labeling of some of its products, Judge Anello noted the plaintiff’s allegations as to her own specific experience with Kraft Heinz products were conclusory and lacking in detail.

Judge Anello also noted that Alaei did not have standing to assert claims related to Kraft Heinz products that she herself had not purchased. In her Kraft Heinz class action lawsuit, Alaei had alleged only that she purchased Heinz 57 sauce and not any other Kraft Heinz products.

Alaei could have established standing had those other Kraft Heinz products been substantially similar to the one she had purchased, Judge Anello said. However, Alaei failed to allege such a similarity in her pleadings, the judge stated.

The plaintiff’s claims under California consumer protection laws also failed to meet a technical requirement, the judge noted. Alaei did not include with her Kraft Heinz class action lawsuit the affidavit required by the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

Judge Anello dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, giving Alaei a chance to amend her pleadings by May 13, 2016.

Alaei filed this Kraft Heinz class action lawsuit earlier this year. She claimed that in November 2015, she bought a bottle of Heinz 57 sauce made by defendant Kraft Heinz, at a cost to her of $6.29. The plaintiff said she relied on an indication on the sauce’s label that said it had been manufactured in the United States. She later found out that some of the ingredients were allegedly sourced overseas.

Alaei argued that the alleged foreign-made ingredients were of inferior quality, making the final product not worth the purchase price. She argued that Kraft Heinz’s actions constituted fraud and violated California consumer protection laws like the Consumers Legal Remedies Act.

In February, Kraft Heinz asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit arguing that Alaei’s allegations weren’t specific enough as to which Kraft Heinz products were at issue and where the controversial ingredients were sourced. The company also argued that Alaei was in no position to represent an entire plaintiff Class, having only purchased a single bottle of Heinz 57 sauce.

Alaei argued that she had indeed been specific enough, having listed turmeric, jalapeños and tamarind extract among the ingredients at issue.

The proposed Class would represent all persons in California who, within four years preceding the filing of the lawsuit, purchased Kraft Heinz products that were labeled as having been made in the U.S. despite having actually been foreign-made or contained foreign-sourced ingredients.

Plaintiff’s counsel is Abbas Kazerounian of Kazerouni Law Group APC.

The Kraft Heinz “Made In U.S.A.” False Labeling Class Action Lawsuit is Suzanne Alaei v. Kraft Heinz Food Co., Case No. 3:15-CV-02961, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

UPDATE: The plaintiff who got a second chance at pleading the Kraft Heinz class action lawsuit is facing a second attempt at dismissal.