9th Circuit will not reevaluate Sprout nutrition label class action

Update: 

• The 9th Circuit declined to reverse its decision to partially revive a class action lawsuit against Sprout Foods over claims it misled consumers into believing its baby food products are healthy for children. 
• The appeals court partially revived the complaint earlier this year after a lower court dismissed it in 2022. 
• In August, Sprout Foods filed a motion seeking a panel rehearing or full-court review of the 9th Circuit’s decision. 
• The company argued the 9th Circuit majority failed to properly interpret a California law when reviving claims under the state’s Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law.
• The 9th Circuit also revived a claim of unjust enrichment while affirming the dismissal of false advertising, fraud and deception allegations.  
• The class action lawsuit argues Sprout Foods misleadingly represented its baby food products as healthy for children younger than age 2 despite their allegedly high sugar content. 

Sprout baby food class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Two plaintiffs have filed a false advertising class action lawsuit against Sprout Foods Inc.
• Why: Sprout unlawfully displays certain nutrition content claims on some of its baby food products, according to the lawsuit.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

(Feb. 24, 2022)
Sprout Foods Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit alleging it deceptively marketed its Sprout brand baby and toddler food products to convince parents that the products are healthier for children under the age of 2 than competing products.

Based on this marketing, plaintiffs Gillian Davidson and Samuel Davidson say they paid a premium for Sprout baby food products.

The Sprout class action lawsuit points to more than two dozen Sprout baby food products that are allegedly intended for children under the age of 2. Many of the listed products are baby food “pouches” that contain pureed baby food.

As of 2018, these Sprout baby food packages account for 25% of baby food sales in the United States, according to the false advertising class action lawsuit.

Sprout class action says baby food products unlawfully misbranded

Despite the fact that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) explicitly prohibits certain nutrient content claims for foods intended for children younger than 2, Sprout products include prominent nutrient claims on their labels, the class action lawsuit alleges.

As an example, the plaintiffs point to Sprout “Power Pak” baby food pouches which state on the front label that they contain “3g of Protein, 5g of Fiber and 300mg Omega-3 from Chia ALA.” The packaging also allegedly states that the product is intended for children aged “12 Months & Up.”

In California, a misbranded food product cannot legally be manufactured, distributed, sold, advertised or possessed in the state.

“Misbranded products have no economic value and are legally worthless,” the lawsuit alleges.

Sprout baby food labeling unlawful, deceptive, misleading, according to lawsuit

The Sprout class action lawsuit claims the advertising and labeling of Sprout baby food products is unlawful, deceptive, and misleading.

“These claims deceive and mislead reasonable consumers into believing that the Products will provide more benefits than its competitors and induces parents to purchase the Products despite a lack of evidence that an increased intake for the nutrients are appropriate or recommended for infants and toddlers less than 2 years of age,” according to the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs each claim that they purchased Sprout baby food products because they believed them to be superior in providing nutrition for their children. Had the products not been unlawfully and misleadingly labeled, they say they would not have purchased them or would not have paid as much for them.

They filed the Sprout class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and a proposed class of persons in California who purchased the Sprout baby food products since Feb. 18, 2018.

In 2021, Sprout Foods faced a class action lawsuit alleging it mislabeled its baby food products as “organic” and “healthy” when they contained unsafe levels of toxic metals.

You may qualify for a lawsuit claim review if you have a child who consumed Sprout baby food and was diagnosed with autism, another neurological disorder or a cognitive deficiency (links to paid attorney content).

The plaintiffs are represented by Seth A. Safier, Marie A. McCrary and Hayley Reylolds of Gutride Safier LLP

The Sprout Baby Food Class Action Lawsuit is Gillian Davidson, et al. v. Sprout Foods Inc., Case No. 4:22-cv-01050, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Nuk class action alleges pacifier falsely advertised as 100% sustainable
• Hatch Baby class action alleges power adapter can detach, posing shock hazard
• Walmart class action alleges retailer overcharges for food, baby products
• Jury awards $63M in cancer patient’s J&J talc trial