Reynolds

Reynolds v. The Coca-Cola Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 25, 20233:23-cv-01446California1,977 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY REYNOLDS, Case No. 23-cv-01446-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART THE MOTION

TO DISMISS

THE COCA-COLA COMPANY,

Re: Dkt. No. 27 Defendant.

The motion to dismiss is granted with regard to the sentence “Minute Maid Juice Boxes are Good for You!” That sentence may well be misleading in the colloquial sense of the term and within the meaning of state law, but the applicable FDA regulations authorize the sentence, so the state law claims challenging its veracity are preempted. The motion to dismiss is denied with regard to the sentence “Enjoy Minute Maid Juice Boxes as Part of a Healthy Balanced Diet.” Coca Cola has not shown that the sentence is authorized by the federal regulations, and the plaintiffs have adequately alleged that this sentence is misleading. Additionally, Reynolds lacks standing to pursue injunctive relief. This ruling assumes the reader is familiar with the facts, the applicable legal standard, and the arguments made by the parties. Preemption. The “Good for You!” statement on the back of the juice box is an allowed implied…

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.