Beyond Meat Class Action Filed Over PETA Texts

A class action lawsuit has been waged against Beyond Meat and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) by an individual who claims that the companies are sending out unsolicited text messages in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Plaintiff Nazrin Massaro says that the defendants sent an unsolicited text to her cell phone with the following message: “DYK Beyond Meat is available at all On The Border locations? Yum! Be sure to order it at your local restaurant. <3 Melissa from PETA.”

The plaintiff argues that the text messages were sent by PETA at the direction or under the control of Beyond Meat.

The Beyond Meat class action claims that prior to sending out the text messages, PETA consulted with Beyond Meat about the content of the messages and received final approval to send them out.

While PETA was responsible for sending out the text messages, Beyond Meat maintained the right to change or add anything to the content of the messages, according to the Beyond Meat class action lawsuit.

Massaro claims that Beyond Meat authorized PETA to promote its products using unsolicited text messaging services. In addition, the plaintiff states that Beyond Meat was aware that the unsolicited texts were in violation of the TCPA but chose to authorize them anyways.

According to the Beyond Meat class action, the purpose of the unsolicited text messages was to promote the defendants’ products, which is plainly evident from the content of the messages. The plaintiff states that even if a text message is not deemed as telemarketing, the defendant still must obtain the plaintiff’s prior written consent.

“While Defendant PETA, as a non-profit organization, would typically not be subject to the FCC’s express written consent rule, it is in this case because it was acting as a conduit for Defendant Beyond Meat, a for profit corporation, and because it was engaged in marketing,” argues Massaro.

The TCPA class action lawsuit notes that at no time did the plaintiff provide consent to be contacted by the defendants using automated text messages. Despite the alleged lack of consent, the defendant reportedly used an Automated Telephone Dialing System (ATDS) to send the unsolicited texts to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff says that her number was retrieved from a list of numbers in the sequential order in which the numbers were listed and then the defendant used an ATDS to send out the text messages. The Beyond Meat class action claims that the system is capable of sending out thousands of text messages in a matter of minutes, if not less.

The TCPA prohibits anyone from calling a cell phone number using an ATDS or an artificial or prerecorded voice without consent from the recipient, the plaintiff argues.

In addition, the federal law prohibits anyone from initiating a call to any residential telephone line using an artificial or recorded voice without prior consent from the recipient, the Beyond Meat class action lawsuit alleges.

Massaro says that the number used by the defendants (738-22) to transmit the unsolicited text messages is known as a “short code” which is used by Multimedia Messaging Systems to send texts to individuals. Only computers can send text messages using short codes, according to the plaintiff.

“Defendants’ unsolicited text messages caused Plaintiff actual harm, including invasion of her privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion. Defendants’ text messages also inconvenienced Plaintiff and caused disruption to her daily life,” according to the Beyond Meat TCPA class action lawsuit.

According to the FCC, calls in violation of the TCPA are prohibited because automated and pre-recorded telephone calls are “a greater nuisance and invasion of privacy than live solicitation calls, and such calls can be costly and inconvenient.”

In addition, the plaintiff notes that the FCC recognized that wireless consumers are charged for incoming calls even if they pay in advance or after minutes are used.

By filing this Beyond Meat class action lawsuit, the plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief to stop the defendants’ allegedly unlawful conduct. Massaro also seeks statutory damages on behalf of herself and Class Members as well as any other legal remedies resulting from the defendants’ illegal actions.

Prospective Class Members in this class action lawsuit are: “All persons within the United States who, within the four years prior to the filing of this Complaint, were sent a text message using the same type of equipment used to text message Plaintiff, promoting Defendant Beyond Meat’s goods, from Defendants or anyone on Defendants’ behalf, to said person’s cellular telephone number.”

Have you received unsolicited text messages? Leave a message in the comments section below.

The plaintiff is represented by Craig M. Nicholas and Alex Tomasevic of Nicholas and Tomasevic LLP, Manuel S. Hiraldo of Hiraldo PA and Jonathan M. Kirkland of Kirkland Law LLC.

The Beyond Meat TCPA Class Action Lawsuit is Massaro v. Beyond Meat Inc., et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-00510, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Volvo Wants Android Compatibility Class Action Tossed

Hurricane Insurance Claims May Be Expedited Under Consumer Protection Act

One Protein Bar Sugar Content Class Action Tossed

What Hernia Mesh Has Been Recalled?

Join a Free TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

GET A FREE CASE EVALUATION NOW