Cordes v. Boulder Brands USA, Inc.

Opinion

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings (In Chambers): Order GRANTING Defendant's motion to dismsis

Before the Court is Defendant Boulder Brands USA, Inc.'s ("Defendant") motion to dismiss. See Dkt. # 12 ("Mot."). Plaintiff Mark Cordes ("Plaintiff") has opposed this motion, see Dkt. # 25 ("Opp."), and Defendant replied, see Dkt. # 16 ("Reply"). The Court finds the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; L.R. 7-15. Having considered the moving papers, the Court GRANTS the motion.

I. Background

Defendant manufactures Glutino Gluten Free Pretzels products, including Glutino Gluten Free Fudge Covered Pretzels (the "Product"). Complaint, Dkt. # 1 ("Compl."), ¶¶ 1-2. The Product is sold in an opaque package that contains more than forty percent empty space—referred to in the industry as "slack-fill." Id. ¶ 3. Plaintiff purchased the Product in June 2018 in La Habra, California for the dual purpose of enjoying its contents and determining whether the packaging was lawfully filled. Id. He alleges that he was surprised to discover so much slack-fill [*2]  in the Product's package. Id.

Plaintiff brings suit on behalf of a class of individuals ("the Class") who purchased all varieties of Defendant's gluten-free pretzel products in California, including the varieties that Plaintiff did not personally purchase. Id. ¶ 2. He asserts a single cause of action under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750 et seq., claiming that the amount of slack-fill deceives consumers into believing that Defendant's packages contain more pretzels than they actually do. Id. ¶¶ 39-50.

Defendant moves to dismiss, arguing that Plaintiff lacks standing and that his complaint fails to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See generally Mot.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.