Juice Labeling and Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola: A Legal Overview Page: 2 of 17
This report is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Research Service Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Juice Labeling and Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola: A Legal Overview
Summary
This report discusses two different federal statutes that regulate beverage labels. The Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and its implementing regulations outline requirements for beverage
labels reflecting the different ingredients of the juice. The FDCA also prohibits misbranded food
and beverages when labels are false and misleading. The Lanham Act, the federal trademark
statute that regulates unfair competition, also prohibits misleading labels and advertisements that
may hurt a competitor's business and/or goodwill. While these two statutes both impact juice
labels, the overall purpose and enforcement of these two statutes differ. Only the federal
government can enforce the FDCA, while the Lanham Act allows competitors to enforce the act's
principles in the courts. The Lanham Act prohibits unfair competition, while the FDCA seeks to
ensure public health and safety. These similarities and differences raise questions regarding the
legal options for businesses claiming harm from a misleading or misbranded beverage label, such
as the negative impact on the market for their products. Such questions include whether a
business can seek relief against a competitor's misleading juice label in court.
The courts and parties in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola encountered this issue, specifically
regarding Coca-Cola's allegedly misleading juice label. In 2008, Pom brought suit against Coca-
Cola alleging that Coca-Cola's Pomegranate Blueberry beverage name and label violates the
Lanham Act and California's unfair competition laws because it misleads consumers to believe
that the beverage consists of primarily pomegranate and blueberry juices when it actually
contains mostly apple and grape juices. The district court in California and the Ninth Circuit held
that the FDCA precludes Pom's Lanham Act claim because of the Food and Drug
Administration's (FDA's) exclusive authority to regulate food labels and the absence of any FDA
action against Coca-Cola for this label. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Pom may bring a
Lanham Act claim alleging unfair competition from misleading beverage labels regulated by the
FDCA because of the absence of anything in the text, legislative history, or structure of the FDCA
or the Lanham Act that shows congressional intent to preclude such Lanham Act claims.
The two legal issues before the courts in Pom Wonderful focused on the interaction of federal
statutes with both state and federal laws. On remand, the lower courts will have to consider again
the issues of preemption, specifically whether the FDCA preempts Pom's California state law
claims when the state law provisions are not identical to the federal law. Additionally, the
Supreme Court's preclusion analysis in Pom Wonderful adds to the case history addressing the
preclusion of Lanham Act claims by the FDCA. However, as consumers appear increasingly
concerned about how food products are labeled, further litigation may be needed to clarify how
the Supreme Court's holding in Pom Wonderful applies to Lanham Act food and beverage claims
that are dissimilar to Pom's Lanham Act claim. Similarly, it is unclear how Pom Wonderful may
apply to other FDA-regulated products such as drugs and cosmetics. Despite the possibility for
further litigation, Pom Wonderful provides a useful opportunity to observe and understand the
interplay between two federal statutes that can be applied to the wider federal regulatory context.Congressional Research Service
c11173008
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Lanza, Emily M. Juice Labeling and Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola: A Legal Overview, report, July 28, 2014; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc805595/m1/2/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.