Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Judge Sinks Monster Energy Drink Class Action Lawsuit
By John Curran
A combination of federal agency preemption, failures to state a claim and the vagueness of marketing language has led a U.S. District Court judge to dismiss a second amended class action lawsuit accusing Monster Beverage Corp. of falsely labeling its Monster energy drinks.
The class action lawsuit, filed in December 2012 by plaintiff Alec Fisher, alleges that Monster fraudulently labeled its energy drinks as supplements in order to skirt FDA regulations for beverages. Fisher also alleged that Monster energy drinks contain a dangerous amount of caffeine but that Monster’s advertising and labeling “fails miserably at providing any warning regarding the dangers of frequent or excessive consumption of caffeine.”
The issue that could have led the court to torpedo nearly every count in the Monster energy class action lawsuit is that citizen plaintiffs cannot act on behalf of a regulatory agency if that organization has not released regulations pursuant to the marketing claims allegedly injurious to users.
Federal Judge Virginia Phillips noted that while the Food and Drug Administration has announced that it will investigate the impact of caffeine on sports drinks, there are currently no regulations on the labeling of the stimulant in beverages including Monster energy drinks. As a result, class action lawyers for Alec Fisher and other California residents cannot seek damages on labeling requirements beyond what the federal government requires.
In addition, Judge Phillips decided that the claims of the plaintiffs were not particular enough regarding what on- and off-labeling they followed, and whether or not the statements would mislead a reasonable consumer. The Monster energy false advertising class action lawsuit focused on three statements: “Hydrates Like a Sports Drink[,]” “Re-Hydrate[,]” and that the various drinks included the “ideal combo” of ingredients.
In determining that the phrases were “non-actionable puffery,” the motion to dismiss the second amended complaint noted that hydration is a “vague” and “subjective” statement. Moreover, all plaintiffs failed to state that they relied on several of these claims.
The updated class action lawsuit, Phillips added, still contains “many of the facts specifically noted by the Court as irrelevant and unnecessary” after she had already provided a list of such items in dismissing the original complaint regarding Monster Energy drinks with partial leave to amend.
The plaintiffs are represented by Azra Mehdi and Arcelia Hurtado of The Mehdi Firm PC.
The Monster Energy Drink Class Action Lawsuit is Alec Fisher, et al. v. Monster Beverage Corp., et al., Case No. 12-cv-02188, U.S. District Court, Central District of California.
UPDATE: On July 8, 2016, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived part of a false advertising class action lawsuit that alleges the labels on Monster Beverage Corp.’s energy drink products misled consumers into believing the beverage was safe.
All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions
2 thoughts onJudge Sinks Monster Energy Drink Class Action Lawsuit
UPDATE: On July 8, 2016, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived part of a false advertising class action lawsuit that alleges the labels on Monster Beverage Corp.’s energy drink products misled consumers into believing the beverage was safe.
HELLO,
I HAVE PURCHASED AND UTILIZED THIS PARTICULAR PRODUCT, CURRENTLY, AND IN THE PAST…
PLEASE CONTACT ME AT YOUR CADENCE REGARDING THIS LAWSUIT…