Ninth Circuit Panel Stays “Natural” Food Labeling Case Pending Ongoing FDA Proceedings
Time 2 Minute Read

We previously reported on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA’s”) request for public comment concerning the use of the term “natural” on food labels, and we noted that businesses should consider seeking a stay of any pending lawsuits challenging their use of the term “natural” on food labels under the primary jurisdiction doctrine. The Ninth Circuit, home of the infamous “Food Court,” has now invoked that doctrine and has ordered the stay of a pending “natural” mislabeling class action in Kane v. Chobani, LLC, No. 14-15670.

In Kane, the three-judge panel based its decision to stay the case on primary jurisdiction grounds. The plaintiffs’ claims asserted that the defendant’s use of the term “natural” on its yogurt products was deceptive and otherwise unlawful. According to the panel, the delineation of the proper scope and permissible usage of that term “implicates technical and policy questions that should be addressed in the first instance by the agency with regulatory authority over the relevant industry rather than by the judicial branch.” Noting the FDA’s ongoing proceedings regarding the use of the term “natural,” the panel determined that a stay was appropriate under the primary jurisdiction doctrine. The panel noted, however, that the district court could limit the duration of the stay “[i]f future events render the FDA’s apparently imminent resolution of the…‘natural’ issues illusory.”

But the decision was not all good news – at least for the defendant in that case. The panel vacated the district court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss in favor of a stay pending FDA action.

Although the primary jurisdiction doctrine arguably worked to the plaintiffs’ advantage in Kane, businesses now have a stronger basis to stay “natural” mislabeling cases in their early stages. It now remains to be seen how the FDA will come down on the proper use of “natural” on food labels. In the meantime, we anticipate further lawsuits will be stayed on primary jurisdiction grounds.

  • Partner

    Jason is a class action litigator who represents innovators and disruptors at the complex intersection of the law and novel technologies. He focuses his practice on class action defense, mass arbitration, and other complex ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, limiting damages, applies retroactively to pending cases.

Time 2 Minute Read

California has introduced Assembly Bill 2244, proposing a pioneering “California Certified” labeling standard for foods not classified as ultra-processed. The bill relies on forthcoming regulatory definitions and imposes retail placement requirements for qualifying products. As California continues to advance UPF regulation, this initiative is expected to shape food law trends nationwide.

Time 1 Minute Read

As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives blog, SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making.

Time 1 Minute Read

The California Consumer Privacy Act continues to drive significant enforcement activity—particularly when minors’ data is involved. In a recent action, the California Privacy Protection Agency imposed a $1.1 million fine on youth sports platform PlayOn Sports for alleged violations involving student data and inadequate opt-out mechanisms. The case highlights growing regulatory scrutiny around how companies collect, share, and provide transparency about personal information—especially when schools and students are involved. 

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page