Smith v. Keurig Green Mountain, Inc.

I. BACKGROUND

17 A. Factual Background 18 Plaintiff Smith brings this consumer class action against Defendant Keurig Green 19 Mountain, Inc., alleging that Defendant’s “recyclable” labeling on its plastic single-serve coffee 20 pods (the “Products”) is false and misleading. See generally Dkt. No. 20. Plaintiff alleges that 21 despite the fact that “Defendant advertises, markets and sells the Products as recyclable,” 22 municipal recycling facilities are not properly equipped to handle the pods, which are small and 23 “inevitably contaminated with foil and food waste.” Id. ¶¶ 2, 19. And Plaintiff alleges that “even 24 to the extent facilities exist that are capable of segregating the Products . . . and then cleaning any 25 contamination . . . the Products end up in landfills anyway as there is no market to reuse the 26 Products or convert them into a material that can be reused[.]” Id. ¶ 2. Plaintiff contends that if 27 she had known that the Products were not recyclable, she would not have purchased them, or would have paid less for them. Id. ¶ 4. Based on those facts, the complaint asserts the following causes of action: (1) breach of express warranty;…