Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Mohammed Rahman v. Mott's LLP
-
July 05, 2017
9th Circ. Denies Apple Juice False-Ad Consumers Second Bite
The Ninth Circuit on Wednesday refused to undo a ruling denying certification to consumers who'd alleged they were tricked by the "no sugar added" labeling on Mott's LLP's apple juice, finding the lead buyer couldn't explain why he wanted a liability-only class.
-
April 19, 2017
'No Sugar Added' Claims Vex 9th Circ. In Juice Labeling Suits
A Ninth Circuit panel heard arguments Wednesday in separate putative class actions against Mott's and Ocean Spray on claims they promised juice products had "no sugar added," tackling thorny food labeling questions like how buyers can show that a class had a shared understanding of what a label means.
-
November 19, 2015
Apple Juice False-Ad Consumers Ask 9th Circ. For Second Bite
A group of consumers told the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday that a California district court unfairly rejected their bid for classwide injunctive relief against Mott's LLP over its use of "no sugar added" on its apple juice labels, and asked the circuit court to settle the standard for pursuing an injunction.