Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Tea Leaves Tell Tales: Jury Awards $2.36 Million for Bigelow’s “Manufactured in the USA 100%” Label
On April 8, 2025, a California jury found that R.C. Bigelow, Inc., the well-known manufacturer of Bigelow teas, intentionally or recklessly misled consumers by claiming that some of its teabags were “Manufactured in the USA.” Generally speaking, “Made in the USA” labels, or those containing similar language, require the underlying product be “all or virtually all” made in the United States. The Bigelow tea products at issue in the California case of Banks v. R.C. Bigelow, Inc. (No. 2:20-cv-06208), however, failed to measure up. The price for this mislabeling was steep, with the jury awarding the class action plaintiffs $2.36 million.
Not Their Cup of Tea: The Beginning of a Saga
Nearly five years before the verdict was read, on July 13, 2020, a group of California plaintiffs filed a putative class action against Bigelow for the way it labeled several of its tea products. Banks v. R.C. Bigelow, Inc., 536 F. Supp. 3d 640, 644 (C.D. Cal. 2021) (hereinafter “Bigelow I”). This list included some of Bigelow’s self-described “Most Popular Teas” such as Bigelow “Constant Comment” Black Tea, Bigelow Earl Grey Black Tea, and Bigelow English Teatime Black Tea, among several others. See, id., Most Popular Teas, Bigelow.
This premium content is locked for The Intellectual Property Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.