Scott

Scott v. Saraya USA, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 5, 20233:22-cv-05232California5,361 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 LAQUISHA SCOTT, Case No. 22-cv-05232-WHO

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS

SARAYA USA, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 32 Defendant.

12 Defendant Saraya USA, Inc. (“Saraya”) moves to dismiss an amended class action complaint brought by plaintiff Laquisha Scott, who alleges that Saraya’s representations that its granola and other products are “sweetened with monk fruit” or “monk fruit sweetened” are false and deceptive because they are not entirely or predominantly sweetened with monk fruit. The motion is DENIED. Scott has plausibly alleged that these statements, read alongside the statements “sugar free,” “no sugar added,” or “zero sugar” also appearing on the products’ front labels, would mislead a reasonable consumer to believe that they were solely or predominantly sweetened with monk fruit. This supports her claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Consumers Legal Remedies Act (“CLRA”), and False…

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.