Trader Joe’s Tuna Class Action Shouldn’t Be Dismissed, Plaintiffs Argue

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.

Plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit over Trader Joe’s alleged practice of underfilling tuna cans have asked a judge not to grant the grocery chain’s motion to dismiss the case.

According to the court documents, Trader Joe’s argued that the court should dismiss the underfilled tuna can class action lawsuit because the claims were preempted because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is responsible for evaluating the appropriate standard regarding fill.

The plaintiffs argue that similar class action lawsuits against StarKist Co. and Safeway Inc. were allowed to enter the discovery phase of litigation after claims by the defendants, which are nearly identical to those brought forth in the Trader Joe’s motion to dismiss, were rejected by the courts.

“Tellingly, Defendants have failed to explain why this Court should not follow these rulings,” the plaintiffs state.

In their motion opposing dismissal of the Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs point to two class actions against StarKist. Like Trader Joe’s, StarKist sought to dismiss the underfilled tuna can class action lawsuits, but the judges in those cases determined that the lawsuits should proceed into discovery.

The plaintiffs note that the courts determined that dismissal of the StarKist class action lawsuits was inappropriate because the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act “does not preclude actions under state law consistent and arising out of such regulations.” They state that the Trader Joe’s tuna class action lawsuit is based on state law claims that are consistent with the FDCA.

The plaintiffs also note that the courts overseeing the StarKist cases also found that it was inappropriate to dismiss the underfilled tuna can class action lawsuits based on preemption or primary jurisdiction. They also argue that their misrepresentation claims against Trader Joe’s should move forward.

“Plaintiffs allege facts that are simple, clear and powerful,” the court documents state. “Defendants sell cans of tuna that are inadequately filled, according to the established testing methodology for weighing canned tuna. When this basic fact is understood, Defendants’ arguments for dismissal must be rejected.”

The first Trader Joe’s underfilled tuna can class action lawsuits were filed near the start of 2016 in California, Illinois and New York. The plaintiffs in these cases accused Trader Joe’s of failing to fill its cans of store-brand tuna according to federal fill standards. They claim that reasonable consumers would believe that the cans contained an adequate amount of tuna and were misled because the cans were underfilled.

The Trader Joe’s class action lawsuits were consolidated in California federal court in November.

Last month, Trader Joe’s filed its motion to dismiss the underfilled tuna can class action lawsuit.

According to court documents, a hearing for the Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit is currently scheduled to be held on May 1, 2017.

The plaintiffs are represented by L. Timothy Fisher and Scott A. Bursor of Bursor & Fisher PA.

The Trader Joe’s Underfilled Tuna Cans Class Action Lawsuit is In re: Trader Joe’s Tuna Litigation, Case No. 2:16-cv-01371, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On July 28, 2017, Trader Joe’s is seeking a second dismissal of claims that it unlawfully underfills its cans of tuna and overstates the product’s weight on the cans’ labels.

UPDATE 2: On Oct. 3, 2017, a California federal judge denied a motion by Trader Joe’s Co. to dismiss a class action lawsuit accusing the grocery chain of underfilling its cans of tuna.

UPDATE 3: On Nov. 9, 2017, Trader Joe’s has redoubled its efforts to buck a class action lawsuit alleging it dupes consumers by underfilling its tuna cans. The grocer contends that the class action plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act before filing the lawsuit. Trader Joe’s also disputes the plaintiff’s claims that she and the proposed Class were harmed by the alleged underfilled tuna cans.

UPDATE 4: On Sept. 14, 2018, the Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit regarding underfilled tuna cans has ended in a $1.3 million settlement agreement.