Paul Tassin  |  August 2, 2017

Category: Consumer News

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.

Trader Joe's deceptive labelingTrader 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.

Defendant Trader Joe’s Inc. argues that in their most recent complaint, the plaintiffs have merely replaced their dismissed claims under federal law with new claims under California’s Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law. The Sherman Law merely incorporates the same federal standards that got the plaintiffs’ previous complaint dismissed, the company claims.

U.S. District Judge Otis Wright II dismissed the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint this past June. The judge determined that all 10 claims in that class action lawsuit were preempted because they relied on an outdated federal standard, the “pressed weight” standard, for measuring the weight of canned tuna. Plaintiffs responded with their second amended complaint, filed before the end of the month.

In their current motion for dismissal, Trader Joe’s says the plaintiffs’ new theories should be dismissed for the same reason the previous theories failed: they rely on the same obsolete pressed weight standard.

The company points out that although the labels on its tuna cans do not refer to the pressed weight standard, they do disclose both the 5-ounce net weight and the 4-ounce drained weight. Trader Joe’s claims these labels are adequate to give customers a good idea of what they’re buying.

Plaintiff Sarah Magier brought her own Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit in January 2016, claiming the cans of tuna she had purchased from the defendant contained less tuna than was stated on their labels.

She cited testing by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that revealed 5-ounce cans of Trader Joe’s tuna contained anywhere from nine to 25 percent less tuna than the minimum fill level set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

After Magier filed her Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit in New York, other plaintiffs followed suit with claims filed in Illinois and California. In November, Magier’s claim was consolidated with claims from plaintiffs Atzimba Reyes, Christine Shaw and Kathy Aliano, then transferred to Judge Wright’s court in California.

Trader Joe’s moved for dismissal in March of this year. The company argued that the plaintiffs’ state law claims were preempted by federal regulations that govern food labeling.

The plaintiffs were essentially raising claims under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, Trader Joe’s argues. While that act can be enforced by the FDA, it does not create a cause of action that private plaintiffs can bring in their own civil lawsuit.

Claims based on fraud failed because they did not allege the labeling on the cans was misleading, the company argued. The plaintiffs’ warranty claims also allegedly failed because there was no allegation that the tuna was unsuitable for its intended purpose, or that the plaintiffs had brought the alleged deficiencies to Trader Joe’s attention.

The plaintiffs countered that their claims are nearly identical to other underfilled tuna class action lawsuits over StarKist and Safeway brands of canned tuna, claims that survived challenges for dismissal.

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 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 2: 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 3: On Sept. 14, 2018, the Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit regarding underfilled tuna cans has ended in a $1.3 million settlement agreement.

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

10 thoughts onTrader Joe’s Seeks to Avoid Canned Tuna Class Action Lawsuit

  1. Patricia O'Donnell says:

    Please add me

  2. latonia reed says:

    Please add me

    1. Top Class Actions says:

      The case is still moving through the courts and has not yet reached a settlement. Claim forms are usually not made available to consumers until after a court approved settlement is reached. We recommend you sign up for a free account at TopClassActions.com and follow the case. We will update the article with any major case developments or settlement news! Setting up a free account with Top Class Actions will allow you to receive instant updates on ANY article that you ‘Follow’ on our website. A link to creating an account may be found here: https://topclassactions.com/signup/. You can then ‘Follow’ the article above, and get notified immediately when we post updates!

  3. LORETTA Lopez says:

    Add me on please.

  4. melissa ledesma says:

    Please add me

  5. Nitsa Torres says:

    Please add me

  6. Carol Frey says:

    Please add me.

  7. Sean says:

    Add me, please..

  8. Steve Hemphill says:

    Please add me to this class action against TRADER JOE’S UNDERFILLED CANS of TUNA lies about their product misleading .
    Thanks !

    1. Cynthia Thatcher says:

      Add me

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.