Judge Trims Bumble Bee Omega-3 Class Action Lawsuit

A federal judge in California has kept some of the false advertising allegations against Bumble Bee Foods LLC and dismissed others in a class action lawsuit accusing the food company of making false claims about the health benefits and nutrition content of its tuna and sardine food products.

In a Jan 2 order, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh granted Bumble Bee’s request for summary judgment by dismissing claims involving the health benefits Vitamin A and Iron in the Bumble Bee tuna and sardine products, but allowed the plaintiff continue with her false ad allegations concerning the products’ Omega-3 claims.

The original Bumble Bee tuna class action lawsuit was filed in April 2012 by California resident Tricia Ogden against the San Diego-based company regarding products it sells under both the Bumble Bee label and the King Oscar label.

Ogden accused Bumble Bee of making unlawful, false, and misleading claims about its products on the labels themselves and on its websites. Specifically, Ogden’s class action lawsuit took issue with advertising claims that Bumble Bee made about the Omega-3 fatty acids nutrient content in the products.

“Both the Tuna Salad with Crackers product and the Solid White Albacore in Water product state on their labels that the product is an ‘Excellent Source Omega-3,’ while the Sardines Mediterranean Style product states on its label that it is ‘Rich in Natural Omega-3,'” the class action lawsuit says.

Ogden argued that Bumble Bee’s use of the words ‘excellent source’ and ‘rich in’ are not used according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidelines, saying that the products do not contain the required amount to make such statements and do not specify what kind of Omega-3 fatty acids are in the products.

The class action lawsuit also charged Bumble Bee with making false claims about the Vitamin A and Iron nutrient content, which are not made on the label of the products but on the company websites.

Ogden also accused Bumble Bee of making unlawful health and drug claims about the products, which is a claim about the relationship “between the presence or level of a substance in the food and a disease or health-related condition.”

Koh allowed the allegations concerning the fact that Bumble Bee’s omega-3 information isn’t accompanied by information about its fat and cholesterol content.

However, Koh found that Ogden’s other counts did not justify the claim for restitution as the amount of money she spent on the tuna and sardine products was not enough. Therefore, disgorgement was also denied, as disgorgement claims under California law stand based on whether or not they qualify for restitution.

“Ogden concedes that she bought Bumble Bee’s products for taste and convenience, as well as because of Bumble Bee’s allegedly unlawful label statements … which demonstrates that the products had some value to Ogden apart from the statements on the products’ labels,” Koh wrote. “Accordingly, Ogden must present additional evidence of the value of Bumble Bee’s products without the allegedly unlawful label statements in order to obtain restitution.”

Ogden, however, mayy still seek injunctive relief.

The charges that Bumble Bee violated the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act as well as charges of unjust enrichment did not stand.

A hearing to on whether to grant class certification will take place on Feb. 27, 2014. The Bumble Bee Foods class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers who, within the last four years, purchased Bumble Bee products labeled “Rich in Natural Omega-3” or “Excellent Source Omega-3.” It is seeking damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits and more for unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business acts and practices, and misleading and deceptive advertising.

The plaintiff is represented by Pratt & Associates, Nelson & Nelson PC and Lovelace Law Firm PA, among others.

The Bumble Bee Omega-3 Class Action Lawsuit is Ogden v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, Case No. 5:12-cv-01828, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her case in March and her lawyers filed a new class action lawsuit (Garrett v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC) that is limited to California consumers. On Oct. 16, 2014, a California federal judge remanded the new Bumble Bee class action lawsuit to Santa Clara Superior Court.