Graham

Graham v. Central Garden & Pet Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 30, 20233:22-cv-06507California3,988 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 HILLORI GRAHAM, Case No. 22-cv-06507-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 18 CENTRAL GARDEN & PET COMPANY, Defendant.

12 Plaintiff sues Defendant for false and misleading statements on its cat-calming products. (Dkt. No. 1.) Before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 18.) After carefully considering the briefing, and with the benefit of oral argument on March 30, 2023, the Court GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part. COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff is a California resident who purchased Defendant’s Comfort Zone-branded Cat Calming Kit, Multi-Cat Calming Kit, and Calming Pheromone Collar. She read and relied on the product labels, which state they are “trusted” and “proven” to “reduce multi-cat conflict and destructive behavior,” to provide “anxiety and stress relief,” and to “reduce scratching” and “urine marking.” (Dkt. No. 1 ¶ 14.) She believed the products “would reduce tension…

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.