Khasin

Khasin v. R. C. Bigelow, Inc.

Good Law
119 F. Supp. 3d 1153·2015 WL 4874787·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106180
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 12, 2015Case No. 12-cv-02204-WHOCalifornia430 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER REGARDING DISPUTE OVER DISCOVERY OF PROFITS

Plaintiff Alex Khasin alleges that defendant R.C. Bigelow Inc. made false health claims by promoting the presence of antioxidants -in its tea products and claiming associated health benefits. The parties have filed a joint letter disputing Khasin’s entitlement to discovery of Bigelow’s profits and costs.- Dkt. No. 96. Khasin argues that “[a]s long as a theory of recovery of unjust enrichment is present in the case, Plaintiff is allowed to seek some percentage of Defendant’s net profits as a remedy for himself and the class.” Id. at 3. Bige-low counters that its profits and costs are irrelevant because the proper measure of restitution in a food labeling case is the price premium attributable to the challenged label (the difference between the product as labeled and the product as received), not its profits. Bigelow is correct.

The law is clear in this District that “[t]he proper measure of , restitution in a mislabeling case is the amount necessary to compensate the purchaser for the difference between a product as labeled and the product as received, not the full purchase price or all profits.” Trazo v. Nestle USA Inc.,…

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.