Welcome to Class Dismissed

Morrison & Foerster is pleased to announce the launch of our new Class Dismissed blog. Through Class Dismissed, attorneys from our nationally recognized Consumer Class Action and Product Liability practices provide insights and reports on the latest news, developments, and trends that affect consumer-facing companies.


Welcome to Class Dismissed

Morrison & Foerster is pleased to announce the launch of our new Class Dismissed blog. Through Class Dismissed, attorneys from our nationally recognized Consumer Class Action and Product Liability practices provide insights and reports on the latest news, developments, and trends that affect consumer-facing companies. ...›

FDA’s Denial of Citizen’s Petition “Clear” Enough for Preemption of Failure-to-Warn Claims

The Tenth Circuit recently upheld a Utah district court’s finding that a branded drug manufacturer could not be held liable for failing to warn consumers about alleged birth defect risks when the FDA had previously rejected a citizen’s petition calling for the same warnings.  Cerveny v. Aventis, Inc., No. 16-4050 (10th Cir. May 2, 2017). ...›

California Adopts First Green Chemistry Regulations for Children’s Nap Mats and Provides Important Guidance for Its Alternatives Analysis

California took two important steps forward to implement its new Green Chemistry Initiative, also known as the Safer Consumer Products (SCP) Program, to regulate and encourage replacement of toxic chemicals in consumer products.  First, it adopted new regulations for its first priority product, children’s foam-padded sleeping products that contain the flame retardants TDCPP or TCEP,[1] ...›

Supreme Court Says “No” to “Litigation Tourism”

There has been a lot said already about the effect on product liability (especially drug) cases and “mass actions” as a result of the United States Supreme Court’s June 17, 2017 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, No. 16-466.  But what about consumer class actions?  California is a destination venue not ...›

Court Declines to Certify Class in False Advertising Case Without Survey Evidence of a Common Consumer Definition

On June 7, 2017, a Central District Court of California declined to certify a class of consumers who alleged that 5-Hour Energy’s marketing of an energy drink was misleading, finding that individual factual questions regarding the effect of 5-Hour Energy’s advertising statements on consumers predominated over questions common to all plaintiffs.  In re 5-Hour Energy ...›

Supreme Court Slams the Back Door Around Rule 23(f) in Microsoft v. Baker

Introduction.  Yesterday, on June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker et al., a closely watched case in the class action world, and one on which we previously reported here.  Baker presented the following question:  Can a plaintiff who is denied class-action certification and denied Rule 23(f) permission to ...›

The Revival of ECJ Lawsuits: Sweet Tooth For Plaintiffs, or Toothless Claims?

Introduction.  On May 22, 2017, plaintiff Jessica Gomez filed an opposition on behalf of a putative class of consumers urging a federal district court judge not to dismiss her lawsuit against Jelly Belly Co. (“Jelly Belly”) for allegedly misleading consumers by listing “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) instead of “sugar” in the ingredient list of its ...›

June 5, 2017Aviation & Drones

Collaboration, Harmony Key For International Drone Rules

The Federal Aviation Administration’s Small Unmanned Aircraft Rule, called Part 107, broadly authorized simple, visual line-of-sight operations with drones that weigh less than 55 pounds. Part 107 was considered by most to be a strong first step toward integrating drones into the national airspace. But that is all it was — the first in a ...›

Ninth Circuit Affirms No Private Right of Action to Enforce Lack of Substantiation Claims in SeroVital False Advertising Class Action Case

The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s unfair competition law and consumer legal remedies claims, finding that neither claim provided plaintiff with a private cause of action to enforce the substantiation provisions of California’s unfair competition and consumer protection law.  See Kwan v. SanMedica International, No. 15-15496. Background of the Case.  ...›