Plaintiff Opposes Reconsideration for Minute Maid Class Action

The plaintiff of an ongoing Minute Maid false advertisement class action lawsuit against Coca-Cola Co. recently submitted an opposing motion in California federal court, arguing that a ruling in a similar lawsuit did not justify reconsideration of Coca-Cola’s dismissed motion for summary judgment.

On Sept. 4, plaintiff Niloofar Saeidain stated in her opposing memorandum that the popular beverage company had made in improper second attempt at summary judgment based on the ruling by a Florida federal judge in a similar Minute Maid lawsuit.

The Florida Minute Maid case ended with judge’s conclusion that the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act pre-empted plaintiff’s claims regarding the company’s Minute Maid Enhanced Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored 100% Juice Blend.

“It is a transparent and improper attempt to ask the court to review a Florida district court decision in Stansfield v. The Minute Maid Co.,” Saeidain claims in the Minute Maid class action lawsuit. “The motion should be denied because another district court’s decision, even within the same circuit, is not grounds for reconsideration and Coca-Cola is not entitled to reargue the preemption issue in this case based on Stansfield.”

Coca-Cola urged the court for reconsideration after their first attempt at summary judgment was denied by U.S. District Judge S. James Otero, arguing that based on the judge’s decision in the Florida Stansfield case, the California Minute Maid false ad class action could not proceed as planned.

Both the plaintiff of the Florida case and Saeidain claim that Coca-Cola’s product label for their Minute Maid Enhanced Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored 100% Juice Blend improperly overstates the amount of pomegranate and blueberry juices that make up the juice blend. According to both Minute Maid false ad class action lawsuits, the Coca-Cola beverage product is actually 99 percent apple juice.

However, unlike Judge Otero, U.S. District Judge Mark E. Walker who presided over the Florida case found that the FDA did not prohibit labels like the one used on the Minute Maid product in question. Judge Walker also ruled that an image displaying prominent amounts of pomegranates and blueberries did not violate FDA statutes concerning labeling and advertisement of food and beverage products.

In her most recent filing for the Minute Maid false ad class action lawsuit, the plaintiff states that Judge Walker’s decision should not and could not be considered a change in controlling law; therefore, this decision in a different state’s court system cannot provide a basis Coca-Cola’s motion for reconsideration.

Furthermore, Saeidain claims that the company’s request for interlocutory appeal fails to provide notice to the court that it is seeking certification for an appeal and argues that despite Coca-Cola’s reasoning, sending the case to the Ninth Circuit will not speed up litigation. Instead, Saeidain claims that doing so would “put this litigation in disarray,” while “ Coca-Cola pursues a meritless appeal based on nothing.”

The court has yet to make a decision on Coca-Cola’s latest attempt for reconsideration.

Saeidian is represented by Zev B. Zysman of WeissLaw LLP, and Jordan L. Lurie and Robert K. Friedl of Capstone Law APC.

The Minute Maid False Ad Class Action Lawsuit is Niloofar Saeidian v. The Coca Cola Co., Case No. 2:09-cv-06309, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On Feb. 29, 2016, the plaintiff asked a California federal judge to preliminarily approve a proposed settlement that accused The Coca-Cola Company of falsely advertising the contents of its Minute Maid pomegranate blueberry juice.