Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.

Bad Law
679 F.3d 1170·2012 WL 1739704·102 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1781·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9921
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 17, 201210-55861California3,344 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We must decide whether the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act bars a Lanham Act claim alleging that the name and labeling of a juice beverage are deceptive.

I

Pom Wonderful LLC produces, markets, and sells bottled pomegranate juice and pomegranate juice blends, including a pomegranate blueberry juice blend. The Coca-Cola Company markets and sells bottled juices and juice blends under the Minute Maid brand. In September 2007, Coca-Cola announced a new product called “Pomegranate Blueberry” or “Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices.” (The parties dispute the name. We at times refer to Coca-Cola’s product as “Pomegranate Blueberry” but take no view on whether this is its actual name.) This product contains about 99.4% apple and grape juices, 0.3% pomegranate juice, 0.2% blueberry juice, and 0.1% raspberry juice. The front label displays the product’s name and a vignette depicting each of those fruits:

[[Image here]]

Believing that it was losing sales to Pomegranate Blueberry, Pom sued Coca-Cola in September 2008. Pom alleged that Coca-Cola misled consumers to believe that Pomegranate Blueberry consists primarily of pomegranate and blueberry juices when it actually…

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.