A choose denied Kraft Heinz’s efforts to dismiss a proposed nationwide class motion lawsuit over allegations that its merchandise, marketed as free from preservatives, include components that contradict its labels.
On Wednesday, Decide Mary M. Rowland dominated that the corporate should face the lawsuit filed by customers in Illinois, California and New York. The customers main the case have “have adequately alleged” that Kraft Mac & Cheese merchandise contained an artificial type of citric acid and sodium phosphates though they “have been marketed as containing ‘no synthetic preservatives’,” Rowland mentioned in courtroom paperwork.
The customers additionally alleged that the corporate was “deceptive affordable customers into believing that the merchandise are free from preservatives,” the courtroom paperwork acknowledged.
KRAFT HEINZ REMOVES LUNCHABLES FROM NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM
Particularly, the customers alleged that “that citric acid sodium phosphates operate as preservatives.” They cited “scholarly articles describing each Substances’ function in preserving meals,” in addition to steering from the Meals and Drug Administration “that describes citric acid as a preservative,” to argue their case.
“These allegations are sufficient to face up to a movement to dismiss,” the choose wrote.
CHIPOTLE SHAREHOLDER SUES COMPANY AFTER PORTION SIZES GO VIRAL
Kraft tried to get the case thrown out, arguing that there was no proof it used synthetic preservatives in its Mac & Cheese merchandise. It additionally argued that almost all customers would contemplate its components to be synthetic.
Kraft Heinz stands by its labels, telling FOX Enterprise in an announcement Friday that the corporate’s Kraft Macaroni & Cheese “comprises no synthetic flavors, preservatives, or dyes.”
“We stand totally behind our product and are happy with its high quality. We strongly consider that this lawsuit has no advantage and sit up for our day in courtroom,” the corporate mentioned.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
The choose did rule that the customers couldn’t demand new labels as a result of they’re now conscious of Kraft’s alleged misleading practices and are now not in danger.
“Plaintiffs listed below are clearly conscious of Defendants’ allegedly misleading practices, so that they can’t be mentioned to be vulnerable to future hurt from Defendants’ allegedly misleading practices,” the choose continued.
Reuters contributed to this report.