Whiteside v. Chosen Foods, LLC, --- F.Supp.3d ----, 2025 WL 2460192, No. 3:25-cv-00481-CAB-DDL (S.D. Cal. Aug. 26, 2025)
![]() |
| xkcd, "Free" |
Plaintiff alleged that defendants misleadingly advertised
their avocado oil by using a non-GMO label, because all avocado products are
free from GMOs. The court found that reasonable consumers would not receive the
message that other avocado oils had GMO ingredients from the label claims
“non-GMO” and/or “non-GMO Project Verified.” The latter was literally true. “As
a matter of law, the reasonable consumer and purchaser of the Products would
understand that the Non-GMO Project Verified label means that the Products are
certified by the Non-GMO Project,” and nothing more. The court agreed with
defendants “that a reasonable consumer who cares about the GMO status of
ingredients knows that there are no commercially available genetically
engineered avocados, and if consumers had any questions about the Non-GMO
Project’s certification standards, they would review those standards.”
Given that reasonable consumers are expected to know a fair
amount about the world, “as a matter of law, the reasonable consumer of the
Products would understand that only certain foods are available in both non-GMO
and GMO forms, that certain ingredients—including avocado oil—are only
available in a non-GMO form, and that avocado oil is a non-GMO alternative to
canola or vegetable oils.” I think this is a lot to expect of reasonable
consumers—a far better justification would be that reasonable consumers don’t
think through the implications of a claim for other products unless they’re
given more reason to do so than this. “Given this context, a reasonable
consumer would not interpret the Products’ label to represent anything about
whether other avocado oil products contain GMOs or the GMO-free status of
commercially available avocados.”

No comments:
Post a Comment