False Advertising: No FDA Preemption In Pom v. Coca-Cola

Pom Wonderful LLC v. The Coca-Cola Company, 573 U.S. ___ (2014), 134 S. Ct. 2228

This case involves the labeling of a blended juice beverage named "Pomegranate Blueberry," sold under Coca-Cola's MINUTE MAID brand, depicted below.

This beverage contains 99.4% apple and grape juices. The plaintiff, Pom Wonderful LLC ("Pom Wonderful"), produces a competing product containing only pomegranate juice and blueberry juice. Pom Wonderful sued Coca-Cola under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, alleging that the prominent use of "pomegranate blueberry" on the label of Coca-Cola's beverage was deceptive. It was apparently uncontested that the MINUTE MAID brand beverage labeling was in compliance with Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") regulations on juice beverage labeling, which state that the manufacturer may name a beverage using the name of a flavoring juice that is not the predominant juice by volume in the beverage. (21 C.F.R. Section 102.33(c), issued by the FDA under authority granted by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA"), to regulate food and beverage labeling, including to police labeling which is false or misleading, 21 U.S.C. Section 343(a)(1)). The contested label also disclosed the percentages of the actual juices in the beverage, but in smaller type.

The United States District Court for the Central District of California granted summary judgment for Coca-Cola, holding that the Lanham Act claim on the label was barred as a matter of law because it would conflict with FDA regulations, even though Pom Wonderful introduced a survey purportedly showing that 35% of consumers polled thought that the beverage contained mainly pomegranate and blueberry juices. Pom Wonderful LLC v. The Coca-Cola Company, 727 F. Supp. 2d 849 (C.D. Cal. 2010). On appeal by Pom Wonderful, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed and held that the intent of Congress was to comprehensively regulate the field of beverage labeling by giving the FDA sole authority. Accordingly, the plaintiff could not seek to impose more stringent standards of labeling via a claim under the Lanham Act. Pom Wonderful LLC v. The Coca-Cola Company, 679 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2012). The question before the United States Supreme Court, on further appeal, was whether a private party can bring a Lanham Act deceptive labeling claim challenging a product label already regulated, as to possible deceptiveness, under the FDCA. The Court concluded that a private...