This week, we take a look at a decision addressing what a
"reasonable" consumer will know in purchasing a product
(and distinguishing the Seventh Circuit in the process), and at
another assessing the legality of Washington's pandemic-related
shutdown of a waterpark.
MOORE v. TRADER JOE'S COMPANY
The Court holds that, given other information available to
consumers, a potentially ambiguous label for "100% Manuka
Honey" that is not 100% derived from Manuka nectar is not
misleading as a matter of law.
The panel: Judges Wardlaw, Collins, and
Eaton (Court of International Trade), with Judge Wardlaw writing
the opinion.
Key highlight: "[R]easonable consumers
would necessarily require more information before they could
reasonably conclude Trader Joe's label promised a honey that
was 100% derived from a single, floral source. And, although Trader
Joe's ingredient label listed 'Manuka Honey' as the
only ingredient, which Plaintiffs argue 'reinforc[es]
