Hodsdon

Hodsdon v. Mars, Inc.

Good Law
162 F. Supp. 3d 1016·2016 WL 627383·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19268
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 17, 2016Case No. 15-cv-04450-RSCalifornia5,961 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Seeborg, J.

ORDER GRANTING MARS INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT

I. INTRODUCTION

That children and forced laborers pick cocoa beans,on a daily basis is indisputably an international tragedy. The debatable question is whether defendants Mars, Inc., and Mars Chocolate North America, LLC, must inform consumers at the point of sale that Mars chocolate products likely contain cocoa beans picked under such conditions. Plaintiff Robert Hodsdon claims that California law obligates Mars to disclose that information on its labels and seeks to mandate such disclosure. To that end, he has filed three claims against Mars for violations of the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. (Claim 1); the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 et seq. (Claim 2); and the False Advertising Law (“FAL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 et seq. (Claim 3).

Mars contends that Hodsdon does not have standing to pursue these claims, and even if he does, that California law does not mandate such disclosures at the point of sale. Mars also argues that Hodsdon has not pleaded facts sufficiently to establish a violation of the UCL. Finally, it insists that, if…

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.