Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 NOVEMBER 2015

Sales Data Alone Insufficient To Support CAFA Jurisdiction In Gerber's Graduates Puffs Labeling Case

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

In Gyorke-Takatri v. Nestle USA, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of California held that parties in a class action seeking to remove an action to federal court...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In Gyorke-Takatri v. Nestle USA, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of California held that parties in a class action seeking to remove an action to federal court must provide sufficient admissible evidence supporting the jurisdictional basis for removal. No. 15-cv-03702-YGR.1  Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers remanded to California state court an action involving Gerber Products Co.'s Graduates Puffs as a result of insufficient admissible evidence.

Gerber removed the action to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d).  CAFA requires an amount in controversy of at least $5 million.  Gerber argued that the sales amount of Graduates Puffs in California exceeded $5 million during the alleged period and should satisfy the statutory amount.  Gerber attempted to prove this monetary amount through the affidavit of one of its employees who had reviewed sales data provided by a third party researcher tracking the

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