Howard

Howard v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 22, 20243:22-cv-00527California1,429 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRACY HOWARD, et al., Case No. 22-cv-00527-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

v. CLASS CERTIFICATION

HAIN CELESTIAL GROUP, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 98, 118, 119 Defendant.

The motion for class certification is denied. This ruling assumes the reader’s familiarity with the facts, the applicable legal standard, and the arguments made by the parties. 1. FDA regulations provide that if a food product is specifically intended for children under two, the manufacturer cannot include certain statements on the label about the nutrient content of the product. See 21 C.F.R. § 101.13(b)(3). The theory behind these regulations is that, with respect to children under two, assertions about the health benefits of certain nutrients are not sufficiently reliable. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60421-01, 60424 (Nov. 27, 1991).1 The plaintiffs contend that Hain Celestial violates these regulations with respect to more than a dozen products by making nutrient content statements on the labels while marketing the products for children under two. Based on this conduct, the plaintiffs bring a claim under the…

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.