ST. LOUIS (Legal Newsline) - A federal judge has dismissed a proposed class action lawsuit against Nike that argued its "Sustainability" products are not as environmentally friendly as the company would have shoppers believe.
St. Louis judge Matthew Schelp on March 28 granted Nike's motion to dismiss on March 28, finding plaintiff Maria Guadalupe Ellis failed to allege a "reasonable consumer" would be tricked by Nike's claims.
"Plaintiff seeks to skirt that requirement by being especially vague on the circumstances present here," Judge Schelp found.
"Plaintiff saw unspecified labeling, marketing, and advertising. Did she read them? Which ones did she see? And, perhaps most importantly, what else did they say? She does not say.
"She supplies only fragmented excerpts from unidentified labels, marketing, and advertisements. Since she did not plead what information was available to her at the time, nor what she reviewed or did not review, the Court does not have near enough of the circumstances.
"She, therefore, has not plausibly pleaded that she acted as a reasonable consumer would in light of all the circumstances."
Schelp joins colleague Rodney Sippel in tossing this kind of class action. He ruled for H&M in a lawsuit over its "conscious choice" collection last May.
At issue are Nike's claims the "Sustainability" line is "made with recycled fibers" which "reduces waste and our carbon footprint" and is part of a "Move To Zero carbon and zero waste."
The suit claims violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act.
"Despite claiming that the Nike 'Sustainability' Collection Products are 'made with recycled fibers,' they are predominantly made with virgin synthetic materials," the lawsuit says. "In fact, of the 2,452 Nike 'Sustainability' Collection Products identified in Exhibit A attached hereto, only 239 Products are actually made with any recycled materials.
"Thus, more than 90% of the Nike 'Sustainability' Collection Products are not 'made with recycled fibers' which 'reduces waste and our carbon footprint.'"
St. Louis firms Orlowsky Law and Goffstein Law represents the plaintiff.
Nike's motion to dismiss, filed last year, said the plaintiff relied only on "substantively and contextually gerrymandered excerpts of Nike’s environmental representations."
The company added: "And even if Plaintiff reviewed only excerpts of Nike’s representations in isolation, which is implausible, Missouri law would not excuse her failure to read the complete representations 'where [she] ha[d] the opportunity to read something but cho[]se not to do so.'"