Snarr

Snarr v. Cento Fine Foods Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 23, 20194:19-cv-02627California5,999 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 DEREK SNARR, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02627-HSG

Plaintiffs, ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION

TO DISMISS

v. Re: Dkt. No. 40 CENTO FINE FOODS INC., Defendant.

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint, for which briefing is complete. Dkt. No. 40 (“Mot.”), 45 (“Opp.”), 51 (“Reply”). For the reasons articulated below, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to dismiss. I. BACKGROUND On July 22, 2019, Lead Plaintiffs Derek Snarr, J. Michael Duca, and Candace Goulette filed an amended class action complaint on behalf of a putative California and nationwide class, alleging violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), and False Advertising Law (“FAL”), as well as two common law claims. Dkt. No. 39 (“FAC”). Plaintiffs’ claims are based on Defendant Cento Fine Foods, Inc.’s packaging and labeling representations regarding its “Certified San…

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.