Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California grants Trader Joe’s Company’s motion for summary judgment in litigation alleging that certain dark chocolate products contained or had a material risk of containing undisclosed heavy metals. The court holds that information about heavy metals in chocolate was reasonably obtainable, easily discoverable, and publicly available, defeating the exclusive-knowledge or similar requirements under New York, Washington, and Illinois consumer-protection laws. The excerpt does not include the complete order or the court’s separate analysis of every claim.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiffs could establish the exclusive-knowledge or non-obtainability element required for their New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 350 omission claims when information about heavy metals in chocolate and dark chocolate had been widely publicized.
- Whether Plaintiffs could establish the easily-discoverable element of a deceptive act under Washington’s Consumer Protection Act when information about heavy metals in dark chocolate was publicly available.
- Whether the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act claims failed because publicly available information dispelled any deception.
- Whether Plaintiffs’ Illinois omission-based claim could proceed where Plaintiffs identified no affirmative communication from Trader Joe’s containing an omission, but relied only on a general failure to disclose.
Holdings
- Plaintiffs could not establish that Trader Joe’s alone possessed information about the presence or material risk of heavy metals in the products, or that consumers could not reasonably obtain that information. Information that chocolate and dark chocolate may contain heavy metals had been widely publicized, so no reasonable jury could find the omitted information exclusively within Trader Joe’s possession or not reasonably obtainable.
- Plaintiffs could not prove a deceptive act based on Trader Joe’s omission because the presence or material risk of heavy metals in chocolate and dark chocolate was easily discoverable by consumers.
- Plaintiffs could not establish deception under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act because information available to consumers about the risk of heavy metals in dark chocolate dispelled any tendency of the omission to deceive.
- Plaintiffs’ ICFA omission claim could not proceed because Plaintiffs alleged only a general failure to disclose and identified no statement or communication from Trader Joe’s that conveyed a material omission.
Key quotations
“The Court concludes that these many articles, the As You Sow test results, and reporting on test results and litigation establish that information on the presence of Heavy Metals in chocolate has been reasonably obtainable, easily discoverable, and available (see infra III.C.1–2) to consumers for many years, including at the time the Plaintiffs were purchasing Defendant’s dark chocolate Products.” (at 12)
“The Court concludes that no reasonable jury could find the presence of Heavy Metals or risk of the presence of Heavy Metals in the Products was exclusively within Defendant’s possession or that a consumer could not reasonably obtain such information given the presence of Heavy Metals has been well publicized for many years.” (at 13)
“The Products’ labels are not a statement or communication for purpose of an ICFA omission because there is nothing affirmative stated on the label on the topic at issue.” (at 17)
Factual background
Plaintiffs purchased or alleged purchases of eight Trader Joe’s dark chocolate products and claimed that the products contained or had a material risk of containing lead, cadmium, and arsenic that was not disclosed on the labels or website. The parties did not dispute that the products’ labels did not disclose heavy metals, that Trader Joe’s relied on vendors rather than conducting its own testing, or that testing showed some level of heavy metals in the products. Trader Joe’s submitted decades of articles, studies, regulatory materials, litigation filings, and test results reporting heavy metals in chocolate and dark chocolate, including some Trader Joe’s products.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint alleging that Trader Joe’s dark chocolate products contained or had a material risk of containing lead, cadmium, and arsenic without disclosure on the labels. The court previously dismissed Plaintiffs’ California UCL, FAL, and CLRA claims, implied-warranty claim, and unjust-enrichment claim, granting leave to amend; Plaintiffs elected to stand on the complaint. The remaining claims were under New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 350, Washington’s Consumer Protection Act, and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. Trader Joe’s then filed a limited motion for summary judgment addressing exclusive knowledge and the viability of the Illinois omission theory.