Pampa Octopus Class Action Says Product is Actually Squid

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.

Another class action lawsuit accuses food manufacturer Transnational Foods Inc. and supplier Conservas Cerquiera SA of falsely representing their products as Pampa Octopus when they are actually squid.

Plaintiff Vivian Lejbman alleges the companies falsely claim the product is octopus instead of squid in order to boost profits. She filed her Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit last week in California federal court.

According to the class action lawsuit, the defendants sell its Pampa Octopus products in the following flavors: Pampa Octopus in Garlic Sauce; Pampa Giant Spiced Octopus in Marinara Sauce; and Pampa Fancy Octopus in Vegetable Oil.

Lejbman asserts that the defendants market, distribute, advertise and sell its Pampa Octopus products based on misrepresentations that are likely to mislead consumers because the products do not actually contain octopus. Instead, they consist of squid, also called calamari, which the Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit says is an inferior and cheaper type of seafood.

The price of octopus has reportedly increased quickly in recent years because the octopus population around the world has dropped significantly due to overfishing. According to the Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit, the European Union in 2005 imposed new restrictions on octopus fishing out of concern that octopus may be at risk of dying out due to overfishing.

While the octopus population is declining, squid have been thriving due to its ability to adapt to changing ocean conditions, Lejbman claims in the canned octopus class action lawsuit.

“As a result of these developments, the cost of Octopus has risen dramatically compared to the cost of Squid,” the Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit says. “In addition, due to similarities in texture, Squid can easily be substituted for Octopus particularly when sold in a sauce like garlic sauce or marinara sauce.”

According to the Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit, the defendants should have known that the so-called octopus products are actually squid and not octopus.

“However, despite this, Cerquiera caused the Product to be called Octopus because the Defendants both profit far more by selling cheap Squid as Octopus, to the detriment of reasonable consumers, like Plaintiff and members of the Class,” the Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit says.

Lejbman says she would not have purchased the squid product, or would not have paid as much for it, if it had not been misrepresented as octopus.

The Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit seeks to represent Lejbman and a Class of U.S. consumers who purchased the Pampa Octopus products in the last four years. Alternatively, Lejbman seeks to represent a Class of California consumers who purchased the products in the last four years.

She is seeking actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, restitution and disgorgement.

Last year, Lejbman filed a similar Pampa Octopus class action lawsuit in Florida federal court.

Lejbman is represented by Benjamin M. Lopatin of Eggnatz Lopatin & Pascucci LLP and James P. Gitkin of Salpeter Gitkin LLP.

The Pampa Octopus Mislabeling Class Action Lawsuit is Vivian Lejbman v. Transnational Foods Inc., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-01317, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.