Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 MAY 2016

No Tea Time For Class Action Plaintiffs: Class Certification Denied For Bigelow Green And Black Tea Drinkers

Morrison Foerster
Morrison Foerster
Contributor
Morrison Foerster

Morrison Foerster

With approximately 1,000 lawyers in 19 offices, Morrison & Foerster is a preeminent global law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Morrison Foerster

Northern District of California Judge William Orrick recently denied class certification in two food misbranding class actions challenging antioxidant claims for Bigelow green and black teas.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Northern District of California Judge William Orrick recently denied class certification in two food misbranding class actions challenging antioxidant claims for Bigelow green and black teas. Khasin v. R.C Bigelow Inc., Case No. 12-cv-02204-WHO (N.D. Cal. March 29, 2016) (green tea) and Victor v. R.C Bigelow Inc., Case No. 13-cv-02976-WHO (N.D. Cal. March 29, 2016) (black tea). Consistent with many courts in this District, Judge Orrick rejected plaintiffs' damages model and found that they failed to establish an entitlement to injunctive relief.

No Viable Damages Model.  Plaintiffs offered three damages models to certify a Rule 23(b)(3) class: (1) restitution; (2) statutory damages1; and (3) a nominal alternative. The court rejected all three models. The court first found that plaintiffs' restitution calculation was not viable because, rather than relying on the Ninth Circuit's accepted "price premium" method, plaintiffs sought a full refund. Judge Orrick noted that

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.

See more popular content from