Elliott

Elliott v. Conagra Brands, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 28, 20252:23-cv-01417California4,542 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LILLIAN ELLIOT, on behalf of herself No. 2:23-cv-01417-DJC-AC and others similarly situated, 12 Plaintiff, ORDER v.

CONAGRA BRANDS, INC.,

15 Defendants.

Plaintiff Lillian Elliot regularly used Defendant Conagra Brands, Inc.’s (“Conagra”) butter substitute product sold under the brand name Smart Balance. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant altered the ingredient ratios of its product — Smart Balance Original spread — thereby reducing its quality, without adequately notifying consumers. After Plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend by Judge Morrison C. England, she refiled a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 41, hereinafter “FAC”), advancing similar arguments. For the reasons discussed below, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not adequately overcome the concerns originally identified by Judge England, and that the newly raised allegations are unpersuasive or Plaintiff lacks standing to bring them. The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s case with…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.