POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca Cola Co.

Good Law
166 F. Supp. 3d 1085·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59951
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 19, 2016CASE NO.: CV 08-06237 SJO (MJWx)California8,602 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Otero, J.

PROCEEDINGS (in chambers): ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Docket No. 498]

These matters come before the Court on Plaintiff POM Wonderful LLC’s (TOM' or ‘Plaintiff) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment ('Motion'), filed on December 1, 2015. Defendant The Coca Cola Company ('Coca-Cola' or 'Defendant') opposed the Motion ('Opposition') on December 18, 2015, and Plaintiff replied ('Reply') on January 5, 2016. The Court heard oral argument from counsel on January 19, 2016. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b). For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART POM’s Motion.

I. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

POM initiated the instant action against Coca-Cola on September 22, 2008, asserting three causes of action associated with Coca-Cola’s sales of “Minute Maid® Enhanced Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored 100% Juice Blend” (“the Juice”): (1) False Advertising under section 43 of the Lan-ham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (a); (2) False Advertising under section 17500 of the California Business and Professions Code; and (3) Statutory Unfair Competition under sections 17200 et seq. of the California…

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.