Judge Tosses Pepsi Artificial Flavoring Class Action Lawsuit Claims

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.

A federal judge recently dismissed class action lawsuit claims against PepsiCo, stating that consumers should have recognized that Pepsi products are artificial.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila tossed allegations against PepsiCo, stating that plaintiff Amy Maxwell should have recognized that ingredients such as phosphoric acid and citric acid meant Pepsi sodas were made with artificial flavors.

Judge Davila argued that phosphoric acid and citric acid, ingredients included on Pepsi packaging, should have alerted Maxwell that the product contained artificial ingredients. “Neither of these ingredients are substances that an ordinary person would immediately recognize as occurring in nature, and the fact that the labels do not call these out as artificial would not deceive a reasonable consumer into thinking otherwise,” Judge Davila stated.

In the Pepsi class action lawsuit, Maxwell argues that the soda maker engaged in unlawful food labeling practices by failing to disclose the presence of chemical preservatives, artificial flavorings, and artificial colors. Maxwell claims that she relied on the labels’ representations which do not identify phosphoric acid and citric acid as artificial ingredients.

The plaintiff states that she “would not have otherwise purchased this product had she known the truth about this product, i.e., that it contained artificial flavors or artificial preservatives.” Although Maxwell’s experience was with Pepsi and several other drinks, she alleges that Pepsi is substantially similar to Caffeine Free Pepsi, Pepsi Max, Pepsi Wild Cherry, Diet Pepsi, Pepsi Throwback, and more.

PepsiCo recently filed a motion to dismiss the claims against them, claiming that Maxwell’s arguments do not clearly identify which statements she relied upon when purchasing the products. The company also stated that Maxwell failed to adequately allege that non-purchased products were similar to the purchased products.

Maxwell argued against the dismissal of claims against PepsiCo by alleging that, despite reading the ingredient list, she assumed that the product was not made with artificial flavors or preservatives since the ingredients were not identified as artificial on the packaging.

The judge found that Maxwell’s argument was not plausible, as the artificial, processed nature of Pepsi is considered familiar to most consumers.

“After carefully reviewing the labels of the Pepsi products at issue, the Court finds that a reasonable consumer would not be deceived by them. The labels contain no affirmative representation that the contents are free from artificial ingredients,” the motion states.

Maxwell initially filed the class action lawsuit against PepsiCo, Pepsi Lipton Tea Partnership, and Unilever United States Inc. in 2012. Although the PepsiCo claims have been dismissed, the remainder of the case against Pepsi Lipton and Unilever remains halted until the FDA makes a decision on what products should be classified as “natural” on food labels.

Maxwell seeks to represent a Class of people who, since Apr. 6, 2008, purchased the same or similar 83 food products allegedly mislabeled.

The plaintiff is represented by Ben Pierce Gore of Pratt & Associates and J. Price Coleman of the Colman Law Firm.

The Pepsi Artificial Flavor Class Action Lawsuit is Maxwell v. Unilever United States Inc., et al., Case No. 5:12-cv-01736-EJD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.