Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 01 JULY 2026

Reasonable Consumer Standard Defeats Omission-Based Mislabeling Claims

Dechert
Dechert
Contributor
Dechert

Dechert

Dechert helps business leaders lead For more than 150 years, we’ve advised the innovators who move...

View firm profile
Explore more from Dechert

Two 2026 decisions show courts using the “reasonable consumer” standard to dismiss omission-based consumer fraud class actions at the motion to dismiss stage. Manufacturers and brand owners facing similar claims should take note: these decisions confirm that proactive challenges to implausible consumer interpretations can be dispositive before costly discovery begins.

United StatesConsumer Protection

Key Takeaways

The “reasonable consumer” standard continues to do meaningful work at the motion to dismiss stage. Two recent decisions involving food products and packaging labels signal courts’ willingness to arm the reasonable consumer with common sense when evaluating omission-based consumer fraud claims.

Plaintiffs in consumer class actions frequently attempt to hold manufacturers liable not merely for what their labels say, but for what they do not say. However, two 2026 decisions—Felsenthal v. Medela LLC, 2026 WL 879337 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 30, 2026) and Testori v. Nestle Health Science, 2026 WL 1282540 (E.D. Cal. May 11, 2026)—support that not every omission can plausibly mislead the “reasonable consumer,” particularly where the alleged deception-by-omission runs contrary to common sense and factual context.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from