Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
II
II
II
Case3:13-00690-JCS Documentl FiIed02/U3 Pagel of 14
1 TINA WOLFSON, SBN 174806
2 ROBERT AHDOOT, SBN 172098 Li3 FE2 s "D
3 [email protected] 55i 2THEODORE W. MAYA, SBN 223242 CW.:x.
4 [email protected] & WOLFSON, P.C.
5 10850 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 370Los Angeles, California 90024
6 Tel: 310-474-9111; Fax: 310-474-8585
TIMOTHY G. BLOOD, SBN 1493438 [email protected]
LESLIE E. HURST, SBN 1784329 [email protected]
BLOO, HURST & O'REARDON, LLP10 701 7Street, Suite 1700
Saiybiego, CA 9210111T: 619-338-1100; Fax: 619-338-1101
12Counsel for Plaintiff
LIJ
51 13 DIANA PARKER
8 14 JCS9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
1511J j_
fc 16NORTHERN DISCICT OICSIFORNIO 9 0
e,17
San Francisco Division
18 DIANA PARKER, individually and on behalf of all Case No.others similarly situated,
19 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
20Plaintiff, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
21v. 1. Violation of California False Advertising
22 Law, California Business & ProfessionsJ. M. SMUCKER CO., an Ohio corporation, Code 17500, et seq.;
23 2. Violation of California UnfairDefendant Competition Law, California Business &
24 Professions Code 17200, et seq.;
25 3. Breach of Express Warranty;4. Violation of Consumer Legal Remedies
26 Act, California Civil Code 1750, et seq.
27 I
28
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-V0690-JCS Documentl Filed02/143 Page2 of 14
1 Plaintiff Diana Parker, by and through her counsel, brings this Class Action Complaint against J.
2 M. Smucker Co., on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, and alleges, upon personal
3 knowledge as to her own actions and her counsel's investigations, and upon information and belief as
4 to all other matters, as follows:
5 NATURE OF THE CASE
6 1. In recent years, consumer consciousness regarding foods and beverages that they
7 perceive to be healthy and natural has been heightened, causing consumers to seek out products
8 marketed as such. As a result, the market for natural or organic foods and beverages has grown
9 rapidly, yielding billions of dollars in revenue for food and beverage manufacturers.
10 2. J. M. Smucker Co. ("Smuckers" or "Defendant") is a multi-billion dollar North
11 American food corporation. In 2012, Smuckers reported over $5.5 billion in annual net sales.
12 3. Defendant manufactures, markets, and sells cooking oils nationwide from its
13 manufacturing plant in Orrville, Ohio, including Crisco Natural Blend Oil, Crisco Pure Corn Oil,
14 Crisco Pure Canola Oil, and Crisco Pure Vegetable Oil (collectively, the "Products").
15 4. In an effort to capture a segment of the lucrative health food market, Defendant has
16 systematically labeled the Products as "all natural" on the product packaging, so that any United States
17 consumer who purchases the Products is exposed to Defendant's "all natural" claim.
18 5. This claim is deceptive and misleading because the Products are made with unnatural
19 ingredients. Specifically, the Products are made with plants whose genes have been altered by
20 scientists in a lab for the express purpose of causing those plants to exhibit traits that are not
21 naturally their own. Genetically modified organisms ("GMOs") are not natural by design.
22 6. Accordingly, Defendant misleads and deceives reasonable consumers, including the
23 named Plaintiff and the other members of the Class, by portraying products made from unnatural
24 ingredients as "All Natural."
25 7. Defendant's conduct harms consumers by inducing them to purchase and consume
26 products with GMOs on the false premise that the products are "all natural."
27 8. Plaintiff brings claims against Defendant individually and on behalf of a California
28 class of all other similarly situated purchasers of the Products for violations of California's False
1
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-00690-JCS Documentl Filec102/U3 Page3 of 14
1 Advertising Law, Cal. Bus & Prof. Code 17500, et seq. ("UCL"), the Unfair Competition Law, Cal.
2 Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq. ("UCL"), breach of express warranties, and the Consumers Legal
3 Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code 1750, et seq. Plaintiff seeks an order requiring Defendant to, among
4 other things: (1) cease the unlawful marketing; (2) conduct a corrective advertising campaign; and (3)
5 pay damages and restitution to Plaintiff and Class members in the amounts paid to purchase the
6 products at issue.
7 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
8 9. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
9 1332(d)(2), because the proposed class has more than 100 members, the class contains at least one
10 member of diverse citizenship from Defendant, and the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million.
11 10. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant is authorized to,
12 and conducts, substantial business in California.
13 11. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2), because a
14 substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in this District as
15 Defendant distributes the Products for sale within this District.
16 12. Intradistrict Assignment: Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-2(c) a substantial part of the
17 events or omissions which give rise to the claims occurred in San Francisco County, and it is therefore
18 appropriate to assign this action to the San Francisco Division.
19 PARTIES
20 13. Plaintiff Diana Parker is a resident of San Francisco, California. Ms. Parker has
21 purchased several Products in San Francisco, California within the past four years in reliance on
22 Defendant's representations that the Products were "All Natural." These representations and
23 omissions were material to Ms. Parker's decision to purchase the Products. Ms. Parker was willing to
24 pay for the Products because of the representations that they were "all natural" and would not have
25 purchased the Products, would not have paid as much for the Products, or would have purchased
26 alternative products in absence of the representations.
27
28
2
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-V690-JCS Documentl Filed02/U3 Page4 of 14
1 14. Defendant J. M. Smucker Co. is an Ohio corporation with its principal place ofbusiness
2 at 1 Stawbeny Lane, Orrville, Olno 44667. Defendant mantifactures and distributes the Products
3 from its manufacturing plant in Ohio to consumers in California and throughout the United States.
4 SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS
5 Defendant Deceptively Labels The Products As "All Natural"
6 15. Within the Class Period, Defendant systematically labeled the Products as "all natural".
7 The Product labels appear as follows:
8
9
10.
Alattirt: 112.
13 tehlui ti,14 Sl
15
16il1.0%,
R.,,,i
itlikNart
ALA 0140,.1tvizi.tv 410110.
17
18 ''''PT '''''''`i'llOillipir 4,....41ta.:.-7.....1.6:
al e19
Oat°.III21 A J, i
it23 5
24
25 lano.26, cadre27
.....yo
28 is Siteavalsi .444.-t
3
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-00690-JCS Documentl Filed02/U3 Page5 of 14
."411 Ally,r,i...., 4„ tive,,3 4 ..e
14
..e0....
5 1,
7 1i
8,, 1 14 1,41P4r ftt I 44.-46t444,30
10-1:. 40001I'100 A0100040I.I0.W4.11 owe+
11...4.. A,. w,-41re• f 6A 1..
...4 At,I
0, tailitils ill*WS -L
if ti3t0AI.14
i
16 440 .001^"'" 4,
117 ritg-t,
i Ailea5"Te"
purevc18
19 11:2='4
20"4 7,: 't.
21 16. By consistently labeling the Products as "all natural" within the Class Period,
22 Defendant ensured that all consumers purchasing the Products would be exposed to its "all natural"
23 claim.
24 17. A claim that a product is "natural" is material to a reasonable consumer.
25 Genetically Modified Organisms Are Not Natural
26 18. The dictionary defines the term "natural" as "existing in or produced by nature: not
27 artificial." (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 788 (1990).) This common dictionary
28 definition of the term "natural" is consistent with the expectations of a reasonable consumer.
4
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
IICase3:13-ce0690-JCS Documentl Filec102/1j3 Page6 of 14
1 19. GMOs are not natural, let alone "all natural." Monsanto, one of the companies that
2 makes GMOs, defines GMOs as "Plants or animals that have had their genetic makeup altered to
3 exhibit traits that are not naturally theirs. In general, genes are taken (copied) from one organism that
4 shows a desired trait and transferred into the genetic code of another organism."
5 (http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/glossary.aspx#g (last visited February 13, 2013)
6 (emphasis added).) "Unnatural" is a defining characteristic of genetically modified foods.
7 20. Romer Labs, a company that provides diagnostic solutions to the agricultural industry,
8 defines GMOs as "[a]griculturally important plants [that] are often genetically modified by the
9 insertion of DNA material from outside the organism into the plant's DNA sequence, allowing the
10 plant to express novel traits that normally would not appear in nature, such as herbicide or insect
11 resistance. Seed harvested from GMO plants will also contain these [sic] modification."
12 (http://www.romerlabs.cornlen/analytes/genetically-modified-organisms.html (last visited February13 13, 2013) (emphasis added))
14 21. That GMOs are not natural is further evidenced by the explanations of health and
15 environmental organizations, such as The World Health Organization, which defines GMOs as
16 "organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur
17 naturally. The technology is often called 'modern biotechnology' or 'gene technology', sometimes
18 also 'recombinant DNA technology' or 'genetic engineering'. It allows selected individual genes to
19 be transferred from one organism into another, also between non-related species. Such methods are
20 used to create GM plants which are then used to grow GM food crops." (World Health
21 Organization, 20 Questions on Genetically Modified (GM) Foods at
22 http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotechlen/20questions_en.pdf (last visited February 13,
23 2013).)
24 22. The Environmental Protection Agency has distinguished conventional breeding of
25 plants "through natural methods, such as cross-pollination" from genetic engineering using modern
26 scientific techniques. (United States Environmental Protection Agency, Prevention, Pesticides and
27 Toxic Substances, Questions & Answers Biotechnology: Final Plant-Pesticide/Plant Incorporated
28 Protectants (PIPs) Rules (Jul. 19, 2001) at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/biotech/pubs/qanda.pdf
5
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
IICase3:13-00690-JCS Documentl Filed02/Z013 Page7 of 14
1 ("Conventional breeding is a method in which genes for pesticidal traits are introduced into a plant
2 through natural methods, such as cross-pollination.... Genetically engineered plant-incorporated
3 protectants are created through a process that utilizes several different modem scientific techniques
4 to introduce a specific pesticide-producing gene into a plant's DNA genetic material.") (emphasis of
5 "through natural methods" added; remaining emphasis in original) (last visited February 13, 2013).)
6 23. As indicated by the definitions above, which come for a wide array of sources,
7 including industry, government, and health organizations, GMOs are not "all natural." GMOs are
8 "created" artificially in a laboratory through genetic engineering. Thus, by claiming that its Products
9 are "all natural, Defendant deceives and misleads reasonable consumers.
10 The Products Are Made From Genetically Modified Organisms
11 24. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant's Products are made from GMOs.
12 Currently, approximately more than 90% of U.S. corn, soy, and canola crops are GMO. In its public
13 "Statement Regarding Genetic Modification, Defendant impliedly supports the use of GMO
14 ingredients by asserting that they are economical, dependable, of higher quality and safe, and
15 Defendant admits that "Due to expanding use of biotechnology by farmers and commingling of
16 ingredients in storage and shipment, it is possible that some of our products may contain ingredients
17 derived from biotechnology."
18 24. Defendant's "all natural" representations are false, deceptive, misleading, and unfair
19 to consumers, who are injured in fact by purchasing products that Defendant claims are "all natural"
20 when in fact they are not.
21 CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
22 25. Plaintiff seeks relief in her individual capacity and seeks to represent a class consisting
23 of all others who are similarly situated. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(2) and/or (b)(3),
24 Plaintiff seeks certification of a class initially defined as follows:
25 All consumers who from February 15, 2009 until the date notice is disseminated to the
26 Class (the "Class Period"), purchased the following Crisco Products in California: (1)
27 Natural Blend Oil, (2) Pure Canola Oil, (3) Pure Corn Oil, and (4) Pure Vegetable Oil.
28
6
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-90690-JCS Documentl Filec102/Z/013 Page8 of 14
1 26. Excluded from the Class are Defendant and its subsidiaries and affiliates, Defendant's
2 executives, board members, legal counsel, the judges and all other court personnel to whom this case
3 is assigned, their immediate families, and those who purchased the Products for the purpose of resale.
4 27. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend or modify the Class definition with greater
5 specificity or division into subclasses after they have had an opportunity to conduct discovery.
6 28. Numerosity. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). The potential members of the Class as defined
7 are so numerous that joinder of all members is unfeasible and not practicable. While the precise
8 number of Class members has not been determined at this time, Plaintiff is informed and believes that
9 many thousands or millions of consumers have purchased the Products.
10 29. Commonality. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2) and (b)(3). There are questions of law and fact
11 common to the Class, which predominate over any questions affecting only individual Class members.
12 These common questions of law and fact include, without limitation:
13 a. Whether Defendant falsely and/or misleadingly misrepresented the Products as
14 being "All Natural";
15 b. Whether Defendant's misrepresentations are likely to deceive reasonable
16 consumers;
17 c. Whether Defendant violated California Business and Professions Code 17500,
18 et seq.;
19 d. Whether Defendant violated California Business and Professions Code 17200,
20 et seq.;
21 e. Whether Defendant breached an express warranty;
22 f. Whether Defendant violated California Civil Code 1750, et seq.; and
23 8. The nature of the relief, including equitable relief, to which Plaintiff and the
24 Class members are entitled.
25 30. Typicality. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). Plaintiff s claims are typical of the claims of the
26 Class. Plaintiff and all Class members were exposed to uniform practices and sustained injury arising
27 out of and caused by Defendant's unlawful conduct.
28
7
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-L90690-JCS Documentl Filed02/013 Page9 of 14
1 31. Adequacy of Representation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Plaintiff will fairly and
2 adequately represent and protect the interests of the members of the Class. Plaintiff's Counsel are
3 competent and experienced in litigating class actions.
4 32. Superiority of Class Action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). A class action is superior to
5 other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy since joinder ofall
6 the members of the Class is impracticable. Furthermore, the adjudication of this controversy through a
7 class action will avoid the possibility of inconsistent and potentially conflicting adjudication of the
8 asserted claims. There will be no difficulty in the management of this action as a class action.
9 33. Injunctive and Declaratory Relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2). Defendant's
10 misrepresentations are uniform as to all members of the Class. Defendant has acted or refused to act
11 on grounds that apply generally to the Class, so that final injunctive relief or declaratory relief is
12 appropriate with respect to the Class as a whole.
13 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
14 (California False Advertising Law Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17500, et seq.)
15 34. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and re-alleges the preceding paragraphs.
16 35. Defendant publicly disseminated untrue or misleading advertising or intended not to
17 sell the Products as advertised in violation of California Business & Professional Code 17500, et
18 seq., by representing that the Products are "All Natural, when they are not.
19 36. Defendant committed such violations of the False Advertising Law with actual
20 knowledge or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known was untrue or misleading.
21 37. Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defendant's representations and/or omissions made in
22 violation of California Business & Professional Code 17500, et seq.
23 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's violations, Plaintiff suffered injury in
24 fact and lost money.
25 39. Plaintiff, on behalf ofherself and Class members, seeks equitable relief in the form of
26 an order requiring Defendant to refund Plaintiff and all Class members all monies they paid for the
27 Products, and injunctive relief in the form of an order prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the
28 alleged misconduct and performing a corrective advertising campaign.
8
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-ce0690-JCS Documentl Filec102/13 Pagel0 of 14
1 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
2 (California Unfair Competition Law Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq.)
3 40. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and re-alleges the preceding paragraphs.
4 41. Defendant engaged in unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent conduct under California
5 Business & Professional Code 17200, et seq., by representing that the Products are "All Natural,
6 when they are not.
7 42. Defendant's conduct is unlawful in that it violates the Consumers Legal Remedies Act,
8 California Civil Code 1750, et seq., the False Advertising Law, California Business & Professions
9 Code 17500.
10 43. Defendant's conduct is unfair in that it offends established public policy and/or is
11 immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous and/or substantially injurious to Plaintiff and Class
12 members. The harm to Plaintiff and Class members arising from Defendant's conduct outweighs any
13 legitimate benefit Defendant derived from the conduct. Defendant's conduct undermines and violates
14 the stated spirit and policies underlying the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and the False Advertising
15 Law as alleged herein.
16 44. Defendant's actions and practices constitute "fraudulent" business practices in violation
17 of the UCL because, among other things, they are likely to deceive reasonable consumers. Plaintiff
18 relied on Defendant's representations and omissions.
19 45. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's violations, Plaintiff suffered injury in
20 fact and lost money.
21 46. Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and Class members, seeks equitable relief in the form of
22 an order requiring Defendant to refund Plaintiff and all Class members all monies they paid for the
23 Products, and injunctive relief in the form of an order prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the
24 alleged misconduct and performing a corrective advertising campaign.
25 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
26 (Breach of Express Warranty)
27 47. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and re-alleges the preceding paragraphs.
28 48. Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the Class.
9
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-cC0690-JCS Documentl Filec102/13 Page11 of 14II
1 49. Plaintiff and each member of the Class formed a contract with Defendants at the time
2 Plaintiff and the other members of the Class purchased one or more of the Products. The terms of that
3 contract include the promises and affirmations of fact made by Defendant on the packaging of the
4 Products, as described above. The Products' packaging constitutes express warranties, became part
5 of the basis of the bargain, and are part of a standardized contract between Plaintiff and the
6 members of the Class on the one hand, and Defendant on the other.
7 50. All conditions precedent to Defendants' liability under this contract have been
8 performed by Plaintiff and the Class.
9 51. Defendant breached the terms of this contract, including the express warranties, with
10 Plaintiff and the Class by not providing the products that could provide the benefits promised, i.e.
11 that the Products were "all natural."
12 52. As a result of Defendant's breach of its contract, Plaintiff and the Class have been
13 damaged in the amount of the purchase price ofany and all of the Products they purchased.
14 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
15 (Violation of Consumer Legal Remedies Act Civil Code 1750, et seq.)
16 53. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and re-alleges the preceding paragraphs.
17 54. Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the Class.
18 55. This cause of action is brought pursuant to the Consumers Legal Remedies Act,
19 California Civil Code 1750, et seq. (the "CLRA") because Defendant's actions and conduct
20 described herein constitute transactions that have resulted in the sale or lease of goods or services to
21 consumers.
22 56. Plaintiff and each member of the Class are consumers as defined by California Civil
23 Code §1761(d).
24 57. The Products are goods within the meaning ofCivil Code §1761(a).
25 58. Defendant violated the CLRA in at least the following respects:
26 a. in violation of §1770(a)(5), Defendant represented that the Products have
27 approval, characteristics, and uses or benefits which they do not have;
28 b. in violation of §1770(a)(7), Defendant represented that the Products are of a
10
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-t000690-JCS Documentl Filed02/143 Pagel2 of 14
1 particular standard, quality or grade, or that the Products are of a particular
2 style, or model, when they are of another;
3 c. in violation of §1770(a)(9), Defendant has advertised the Products with intent
4 not to sell them as advertised; and
5 d. in violation of §1770(a)(16), Defendant represented that the Products have been
6 supplied in accordance with previous representations, when they were not.
7 59. Defendant affirmatively represented to consumers that the Products are "all natural."
8 60. Defendant omitted to state that the Products contain GMOs.
9 61. This sort of information is relied upon by consumers in making purchasing decisions,
10 and is fundamental to the decision to purchase food products.
11 62. Plaintiff relied upon Defendant's misrepresentations to her detriment.
12 63. Defendant's misrepresentations constitute unfair, deceptive, and misleading business
13 practices in violation of Civil Code §1770(a).
14 64. Defendant's deceptive acts and omissions occurred in the course of selling a consumer
15 product and have occurred continuously through the filing of this Complaint.
16 65. On February 12, 2013, Plaintiff notified Defendant in writing by certified mail of the
17 violations alleged herein and demanded that Defendant remedy those violations.
18 66. If Defendant fails to remedy the violations alleged herein within 30 days of receipt of
19 Plaintiff's notice, Plaintiffwill amend this Complaint to add claims for actual, punitive, and statutory
20 damages pursuant to the CLRA.
21 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and Class members, prays for relief as follows:
22 A. For an order that this action may be maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of
23 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that Plaintiff be appointed Class representative, and that
24 Plaintiff's counsel be appointed as counsel for the Class;
25 B. For an order requiring Defendant to refund Plaintiff and all Class members for the
26 Products;
27 D. For an order prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the misconduct described
28 II herein;
11
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-V100690-JCS Documentl Filec102/13 Pagel3 of 14
1 E. For an award of attorneys' fees;
2 F. For an award of the costs of suit incurred herein, including expert witness fees;
3 G. For an award of interest, including prejudgment interest, at the legal rate; and
4 H. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
5 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
6 Plaintiff demands trial by jury ofall claims so triable.
7
8 Dated: February 15, 2013 Respectfully submitted,AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
9
10
11 Tina Wolfs:2-Y2-nRobert Ahdoot
12 Theodore W. Maya10850 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 370
13 Los Angeles, California 90024
14 Tel: 310-474-9111Facsimile: 310-474-8585
15Counsel for Plaintiff,
16 Diana Parker
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case3:13-cts0690-JCS Documentl Filed02/1Z3 Pagel4 of 14
1 AFFIDAVIT OF TINA WOLFSON
2 I, Tina Wolfson, declare as follows:
3 1. I am an attorney with the law firm of Ahdoot & Wolfson, P.C., counsel for Plaintiff
4 Diana Parker ("Plaintiff') in this action. I am admitted to practice law in California and before this
5 Court, and am a member in good standing of the State Bar of California. This declaration is made
6 pursuant to California Civil Code section 1780(d). I make this declaration based on my research of
7 public records and upon personal knowledge and, if called upon to do so, could and would testify
8 competently thereto.
9 2. Based on my research and personal knowledge, Defendant J. M. Smucker Co.
10 ("Defendant") does business within the County of San Francisco and Plaintiff purchased Defendant's
11 products within the County of San Francisco, as alleged in the Class Action Complaint.
12 I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the United States and the State of
13 California this 15th day of February 2013 in Los Angeles, California that the foregoing is true and
14 correct.
15
16
17Tina Wolfson
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
DATE
IL DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil L.R. 3-
SID ATURE OF ATThRbkl Oh RECORD
13-cv-00690-JCS Document1-1 Filed02/15/13 Pagel of 1
JS 44 (Rev. 12/12) chid v (1/1913) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe Il4.4 Civil coy sheet and the fonnation contained heroin neither replace nor rupplernent the lilift and servite ofStadia* or other paperS as required by law, except as
prOVindaby local nflcs ofcourt. Jhis form, approved by die Judicial Conference of the Cloned Stales in September 1974, ts required fOr the use ofthe Clerk of Court for the
oMpose Of initia!ini the civil el sheet. OfEEINSMUCTIONS ONNEVI"PAGV OF MBFORM.)
I. (s) PLAIN1U1IS' I DEFENDANTSDIANA PARKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated I J. M. SMUCKER CO., and Ohto Corporation
gLC.(b) County ofResidence of First Listed Plaintiff So FrancinQUAty.......,. County of Residence of First Listed Defendant 36/Alfraregin1tyStiQoxcEo. IN U.S. IVAINTIIT CASES) ON US PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATIMI CASES, USE THE LOCATION OFTUE TRACT OF LAN 'OLVED.
(e) Attorneys Om NNW. Aeltinear, and 7Werhumt Number)Ste. 370, Los
Attorneys mown) (3 ce .7 ki Cr""AHDOOT & VVOLFSON, PC, 10850 Wilshire Blvd..Angeles, CA 90024, (310) 474-9111; BLOOD, HURST & O'REARDON,LLP, 701 B St., Ste. 1700, San Diego, CA 92101, (619) 338-1100
II, BASIS OF JURISDICTION (piecean "X" *Om Bar ag) M. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES Mote on "X"Mane Hoxfan Mime(For Ettn.msity Com (id)) owl Ow Oat for(Nowa*/
tl I U.% Govemment 0 3 Federal Question PTE DEE PtV DER
Plaintiff (MT Government Nos a l'an,0 Citizen ofThis State X I CI I Itscomotated or Principal Mace 0 4 04of Swim= In ThinSW*
0 2 U.S. Government X 4 Divessity Citizen or Another State CI 2 0 2 Inssitpennal mai Principal Place 0 5 X 5Defendant itrukarte Cotarnam aOutfit's' lo Item111) of %MOM In AnotherState
Citizen or Subject ore CI 3 CI 3 Foreign Nation 0 6 0 6For.eigt1 Country
I V. NATURE OF SUIT (Him. on "X" in One lint CW1vi
tit 0 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0 625 Drug Related Seizure il 422 Appeal 26 USC 136 0 375 False Claims ActD 120 Manse C.1 3113 Airplane 0 365 Panamint Injury orProperty21 USC MU 0 123 Withdrawal 0 460 Slate Reapportionment
D 0 130 Miller An CI 313 Airplane Product Product Liabday 0 690 Other 24 USC 157 0 06 AntitrustCC 0 140 Neeotiable Instiument Liability CI 367 Health Cater CI 430 Ranks and Banking
x al CI 150 Recovery aOverpayment Cl 320 Assault, Libel & Phenomenal PROPERTY RIGHTS 0 4$0 CommerceL) & Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injuty 0 820 Copyrights 0 460 DeportationLL 0 0 151 Medicare Act 0 330 Federal Employers' Product Liability 0 630 Patent 0 Racketeer Influenced and--1 CI 152 Recovery ofDefitulted Liability 3 Mt Asbestos Personal 3 $40 Trademark k pt Organizations02 0 Student Loam CI 340 Maine les)uty Produet II 4 0 nsumes Credit0 I— (Excludes Vetere/0 rt 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR. SOCIAL SECURITY: 0 4i Ci AciSat TV
—4 t— 0 153 Recovery ofOverpsymem Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 710 Fair Labor Standards CI $61 NIA (119511) C3 3 0 Setritice/Cammoditietirz. zofvetrean's Benefits CI 350 Motor Vehicle 0 370 Other Frand Am CI $62 nick Ging (92 EX hatIV
M 0 160 Stockholders' Suits CI 355 Motor Vehicle CI 371 Tnidt in Lending 0 720 Laborfritanagemcnt 0 $63 DIWC/D1WW -05(g)) t., 890 Ott -r Statutory Actionscfr 3 190 Other Contract Product Liability 0 360 Other Personal. Relations 1 464 SSID Title X .3 fret Ag, ulturat ActsCCM 0 19$ Connact Product Liability CI 360 Other Personal Prnpetty Damage CI 740 Railway Labor Act il 865 RSI (40$(g)) CI 693 En itontorntal Mattersa_ 0 196 Franchise Injury CI 3115 Property Damns 0 751 Family and Medical C3 895 F edorn of Information
CI 362 Personal Injury i. Prixturt L3ability LeonAct.etMedical Malpractice C) 790 Othar Labor Litigation CI 896 titivation
1 REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 0 791 Employee Retimmod FEDERAL TA + UITS: CI Ito' Administrative ProcedureCI 210 Land Condemnation CI 440 Other Civil Rijlits Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act CI 670 Titus (U.S. P intiff Amillesiow or Appeal of(2220 Foreelotute 0 441 Voting 3 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) Agency DecisionCI 230 Rota Lease & Ejectment 0 442 Employnwnt 3 510 Motions to Vacate C3 671 IRS—Third Part C3 950 Constindionality ofCl 240 Torts to Land 0 443 Homing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 SPX StItUttis0 245 Ton Product Liability Accommodations CI 530 GeneralCI 290 MI Other Real Propeny t1 44$ Amer, awDisahilities CI 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION
Employment Olken 0 462 Naturalization Applicmion0 446 Amer. w/Disahilities C7 540 Mandamus & Other 3 465 Other Immigration
Other CI 550 Civil Rights Actions1 448 Education 3 555 Prison Condition
0 560 CM1 DetaineeComEtions ofConfinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an Y"aI One Box Only)X I Original 0 2 Removed from 0 3 Remanded from 0 4 Reinstated or 0 5 Transferred front 0 6 Multidistrict
Proceeding Stale Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation(pre&
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are tiling (Pk, not <hePirisildioned armlets milieu illretrairy):28 U.S.C. 13320)(21VI. CAUSE OF ACTI(N.Brief descripti on of cause:Class action alleging false advertising of cooking oils as "M Natural"
VII. REQUESTED IN /fli CHECK If THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND S CHECK YES only if demandtd in complaint:COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. 5,000, 000.00 JURY DEMAND: 1I Yes CI No
VIII, RELATED CASE(S)IF ANY ace initrar
JUD 'E DOCKET NUM13ER
02/15/2013
(Plato an 'X" in One Dort Only) _ID SAN FRINCISCODAKLAND j4JOSE ElEUREKA
