Raisinets Class Action Says Packages Are Deceptively Underfilled

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.

Nestle USA Inc. has been hit with a class action lawsuit alleging it deceptively underfills packages of its Raisinets candy products.

Plaintiff Sandy Hafer of California asserts that Nestle engages in misleading business practices with regard to the packaging and sale of its Raisinets products, including Nestle Milk Chocolate Raisinets and Nestle Dark Chocolate Raisinets.

“At all relevant times, Defendant has packaged and sold the Products in opaque box packaging that conceals from consumers the amount of Raisinets candies inside the box packaging,” Hafer alleges in the Nestle class action lawsuit. “The Products’ packaging leads the reasonable consumer to believe he or she is purchasing a box full of Raisinets candies.”

However, only about 60 percent of the Raisinets packaging is filled with the candies, according to the Raisinets class action lawsuit. Hafer asserts that the remaining 40 percent is non-functional slack-fill that serves no purpose.

“Non-functional slack-fill, like the type employed by Defendant, allows Defendant to reduce its food product costs to the detriment of unwitting consumers, who are not receiving the full benefit of their bargain,” the Raisinets class action lawsuit states.

According to the Nestle class action lawsuit, Hafer purchased a box of Nestle Dark Chocolate Raisinets, believing that the opaque box would be filled with Raisinets. However, the box of Raisinets she purchased contained about 40 percent empty space.

Hafer claims that she would have paid significantly less for the Raisinets products, or that she may not have decided to purchase them at all, if she had known that the packages were only about 60 percent filled. She says the packaging is misleading to reasonable consumers and serves only to maximize Nestle’s profits

The Nestle class action lawsuit points to federal laws regulating slack-fill, which are meant to prevent companies from using deceptive methods of filling their packages.

Hafer also points to U.S. Food and Drug Administration comments that listing the net weight on a product’s package does not protect consumers against misleading slack-fill.

The FDA is aware that there are some justifiable reasons for a package to not be filled to capacity. Some empty space may be necessary to protect the food from getting crushed. Hafer argues that Nestle packages other Raisinets products in tight-fitting plastic bags, and that its oversized boxes are “inconsistent” with the manufacturing and packaging practices for Raisinets.

Settling of the product during shipping may also occur, causing additional empty space within a package. However, Hafer asserts that, in the case of Raisinets, there is no functional purpose for the slack-fill, and it cannot be attributed to settling during shipment.

By filing the Raisinets class action lawsuit, Hafer seeks to represent a nationwide Class and two California subclasses of consumers who purchased the allegedly slack-filled packages of Raisinets candies.

The Raisinets class action lawsuit asserts claims for breach of implied warranty, common law fraud, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, quasi-contract/unjust enrichment/restitution, and violations of California law.

Hafer is represented by Barbara A. Rohr and Benjamin Heikali of Faruqi & Faruqi LLP.

The Raisinets Class Action Lawsuit is Sandy Hafer v. Nestle USA Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-00034, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.