Nabisco Ginger Snaps Class Action Lawsuit Will Remain in Federal Court

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 Nabisco class action lawsuit alleging the company’s Ginger Snaps contain trans fats will remain in federal court, instead of going back to state court.

This week, U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. determined that the Nabisco trans fats class action lawsuit should remain in federal court, despite the plaintiff’s desire to send it back to state court.

According to Judge Gilliam, the proposed Ginger Snaps class action lawsuit shouldn’t be litigated locally, as the lead plaintiff is a California citizen while Mondelez, the owner of Nabisco, is a Virginia corporation with principal operations based in Illinois.

According to the “local controversy exception” plaintiff Valorie Winn tried to use to get the case sent back to state court, federal courts do not have jurisdiction in a case if more than two-thirds of the proposed Class Members are citizens of the state in which the class action lawsuit was first filed, which Judge Gilliam determined was not the case in the Nabisco Ginger Snaps class action lawsuit.

This decision follows Mondelez’s request in June 2017 to keep the case in federal court. The company’s argument was that the Nabisco false advertising class action lawsuit should be in federal court because the product in question is sold nationwide.

Additionally, the company argued that contrary to consumers’ assertions, Pak n’ Save, a California-based grocery store, isn’t responsible for the alleged misconduct and false advertising of the Ginger Snaps.

Mondelez further supported its argument to keep the Nabisco cookie class action lawsuit in federal court because they claim only 12 percent of the Ginger Snaps were purchased in California, so claims brought forward by Winn would have negatively affected consumers around the country.

Winn had argued in May 2017 that the suit should be sent back to state court, under the provisions of the Class Action Fairness Act and its “local controversy exception.”

The Nabisco ginger snap trans fats class action lawsuit was filed in March 2017 by Valorie Winn. She claims that she purchased Nabisco Ginger Snaps cookies on multiple occasions. She says these products were advertised as being healthy, when they were not, in reality.

She alleges that Nabisco and Mondelez’s inclusion of phrases like “Made with Real Ginger and Molasses,” and “Sensible Solutions” on the packages implies that the products are healthy and wholesome, thus catering to consumers’ preference for healthy foods.

Winn claims that the Ginger Snaps actually contain dangerous levels of partially hydrogenated oils and trans fats.

Allegedly, the labeling of the product as healthy and containing no trans fats violate both California state law and regulations set forth by the Food and Drug Administration.

However, Mondelez countered this claim by arguing that the trans fats in the product were in accordance with FDA regulations that applied to food though 2018.

Additionally, Mondelez argued that Winn failed to establish that she had been harmed by the inclusion of trans fats in the Ginger Snaps.

Winn is represented by Gregory S. Weston and Andrew C. Hamilton of The Weston Firm.

The Nabisco Ginger Snaps Trans Fat Class Action Lawsuit is Valorie Winn v. Mondelez International Inc., et al., Case No. 4:17-cv-02524, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.