Search for: "Sugawara v. PepsiCo, Inc."
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
10 Jun 2:43 pm
... . Although the Court did not explicitly invoke that word in discussing why the Complaint had to be dismissed in Iqbal v. Ashcroft, 2009 WL 1361536 (May 18, 2009), truthiness,
it said in essence, is not the pleading ... and common sense are fabulous tools to review factual allegations in context - the who, what, where, when, why, and how - to determine
whether they plausibly support the existence of a cause of action. See, e.g., Sugawara v. Pepsico, Inc., No.
2:08-cv-01335-MCE-JFM, 2009 U.S. Dist. ...
5 Oct 11:41 am
... contains real fruit by associating the product with a word that sounds like fruit. In Werbel v. Kellogg USA, the plaintiff contends that he purchased Froot Loops cereal for
years ... Kix, Trix, Fruity Cheerios, Trix Yogurt, Yoplait Go-gurt); McKinniss v. Kellogg USA, 2007 WL 4766060 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 19, ... Court for the Eastern District of
California dismissed an almost identical suit, Sugawara v. PepsiCo, Inc. In Sugawara, the plaintiff claimed that she purchased the "Cap'n Crunch with Crunchberries ...
2 Jun 11:28 am
... 'n Crunch with Crunchberries" because she believed it contained real fruit. The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only
recently learned to her dismay that said "berries" were ... that there are fields somewhere in our land thronged by crunchberry bushes. According to the complaint, Sugawara and other consumers were misled not only by the use of the word "berries" in ... prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot Link:
Sugawara v. PepsiCo, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-01335, 2009 U.S. ...
12 Jun 2:48 pm
... So I did that. If you read her complaint(s) very closely, Ms. Sugawara may not have clearly said that she thought crunchberries were an
actual fruit that ... this may be because those laws encourage weak lawsuits, not because Janine Sugawara had a compelling case. I can
understand that she probably didn't like the ... they end up on the Internet. The motion is posted below so that the Internet can evaluate the arguments for Itself. Link:
Sugawara v. PepsiCo, Inc., Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration
1 Jul 9:15 am
... U.S. District Judge England in the Eastern District of California dismissed the complaint captioned as Sugawara v. Pepsico,
Inc. Though Sugawara seems purely frivolous, the claim follows predictably from the Ninth Circuit's decision in ... a reasonable
consumer, particularly given that the ingredient list was printed on the side of the box." Judge England distinguished Sugawara from Williams,
writing that while the challenged packaging contains the word "berries" it does so only in conjunction with ...
3 Jun 8:08 am
Videtto v. Kellogg USA, 2009 WL 1439086 (E.D. Cal.) Sugawara v. Pepsico, Inc., 2009 WL 1439115 (E.D. Cal.) Because
the language in both opinions is largely the same, I will discuss them together. Plaintiff Videtto filed a putative class action for California state false advertising violations as
well as intentional misrepresentation and breach of implied warranty based on Kellogg's use of the name "Froot Loops," fruit-shaped cereal ...
Search on: Blawgs.FM | BlawgSearch Google Co-op |
Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blog Search |
Technorati | Google | MSN | Yahoo!