Legal Newsline

Friday, April 10, 2020

Fullbar sued over '100% natural' claims

By Kyla Asbury | Nov 11, 2014

Eggnatz 150x150

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (Legal Newsline) - A Florida woman has filed a class action lawsuit against Fullbar LLC after she claims it wrongly labeled its products as "all natural" when they contain synthetic ingredients

Elizabeth Livingston claims Fullbar sold its Fullbar appetite regular bars as "100% natural" and "all natural" when they contained unnatural, synthetic and/or artificial ingredients, including but not limited to maltodextrin, potato maltodextrin, soy protein concentrate, soy protein isolate and/or soy lecithin, according to a complaint filed Oct. 23 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The defendant manufactures, markets, advertises and sells the products as being "100% natural" on the front packaging of the products, according to the suit.

"At all material times...the products made the exact same 'all-natural' and '100% natural' claims on the exact same prominently displayed location on the front and back packaging for the products," the complaint states.

Livingston claims the representations that the products are "100% natural" are central to the marketing of the products.

The misrepresentations were uniformly communicated to the plaintiff and every other member of the class, according to the suit.

"The '100% natural' claim is false, misleading and likely to deceive reasonable consumers in the same respect — that being due to their unnaturalness for containing unnatural, synthetic and/or artificial ingredients," the complaint states.

Livingston claims contrary to the defendant’s express and implied representations, the products are not "100% natural" because they contain unnatural, synthetic, and/or artificial ingredients.

The products are simply not "100% natural" and, as a result, the products are misbranded and sold pursuant to unlawful, unfair, deceptive, misleading and deceptive business practices, according to the suit.

"At a minimum, defendant’s 'all natural' and '100% natural' statements are likely to deceive reasonable consumers," the complaint states.

Livingston claims the defendant violated Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act.

The products are not "100% natural" because of these artificial, synthetic and/or genetically modified ingredients, according to the suit.

"Maltodextrin is a saccharide polymer that is produced through partial acid and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn starch," the complaint states. "The acid hydrolysis process is specifically deemed to be a relatively 'severe process' that renders an ingredient no longer 'natural.'"

Livingston is seeking class certification and for the defendant to restore all money that it acquired as a result of the unfair and/or deceptive acts or practices. She is represented by Joshua H. Eggnatz and Michael J. Pascucci of the Eggnatz Law Firm PA.

The case is assigned to District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida case number: 0:14-cv-62430

From Legal Newsline: Kyla Asbury can be reached at

Want to get notified whenever we write about ?

Sign-up Next time we write about , we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.