Timmins

BACKGROUND

23 In 2022, Lacey Timmins (“Plaintiff”) purchased Walmart, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) 24 Baby Petroleum Jelly Skin Protectant (“the Product”) to alleviate her son’s eczema and 25 diaper rash. (Compl. ¶¶ 3, 7, ECF No. 1.) Before purchasing the Product, she saw that 26 the front label represented the Product as “hypoallergenic.” (Id. ¶ 8.) Plaintiff alleges 27 that a reasonable consumer understands the term “hypoallergenic” to mean “a 28 product [that] is specifically formulated to minimize the risk of allergic reactions and is free from common allergens.” (Id. ¶ 5.) The front label also represented the Product as having a “Fresh Scent.” (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff alleges that the Product’s back label lists “fragrance” as an “inactive ingredient.” (Id. ¶ 23.) Because Plaintiff alleges that “fragrance” is a common allergen, she maintains that Defendant’s representation of “hypoallergenic” was false and misleading. (Id. ¶¶ 24–25.) Plaintiff filed her complaint (“the Complaint”), bringing seven claims on behalf of a putative class: (1) violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”); (2) violations of California’s False Advertising…