Conagra Brands has filed a new brief supporting its motion to dismiss a class-action lawsuit claiming the company’s use of Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification for sustainability claims are “deceptive.”
The lawsuit, filed earlier this year, seeks at least USD 5 million (EUR ) in damages and heavily criticizes both Conagra and the MSC, claiming the sustainability certification organization “blatantly violates its own standards and puts the very ecosystem MSC feigns to protect in serious danger.” Plaintiffs in the case, Abdallah Nasser and John Bohen, claim the sustainability promises made by Conagra on its packaging using MSC certification “deceives and misleads reasonable consumers.”
Conagra filed a new brief in early October claiming the litigation was a “vehicle to litigate” the plaintiff’s issues with the MSC.
“Plaintiffs do not dispute that Conagra Brands, Inc.’s products contain certified sustainable seafood,” the new filing states. “Yet they continue attempting to transform Conagra’s limited, accurate representations – that the Marine Stewardship Council certified its fish Products as sustainably sourced – into a vehicle to litigate their quarrel with the MSC.”
The plaintiffs in the case, in defense of their opposition to Conagra’s motion to dismiss, claim that the company has “turned a blind eye” to unsustainable fishing practices in its supply chain.
“Defendant [Conagra] sources the fish for its seafood products from fisheries that engage in a litany of destructive fishing practices that indisputably defy Defendant’s Sustainability Promise,” the plaintiff’s response to the motion to dismiss said.
The plaintiffs continue to assert that Conagra’s sustainability claims don’t match up to the company’s practices, with seafood products sourced from what they claim are problematic sources.
The lawsuit lists a litany of reasons the fisheries it sources from are not sustainable, including fishing practices that harm marine mammals, have unsustainable levels of bycatch, or leave ghost gear in the water, “which is the deadliest form of plastic in the ocean.”
In defense of its motion to dismiss, Conagra’s new filing claims that the plaintiffs focused on irrelevant allegations to the lawsuit, rather than the “limited, truthful representations on Conagra’s labeling.” According to Conagra, the plaintiffs fail to adequately allege that the fish Conagra uses in its products are in violation of any specific promise that the company made.
Conagra’s response also said the plaintiff’s claims they were harmed by paying a price premium on products with sustainability claims don’t hold up.
Finally, Conagra said that reasonable consumers aren’t misled in any way by its sustainability labeling.
“Conagra’s front label – displaying the MSC Certification and the phrase ‘Certified Sustainably Sourced’ –is not deceptive because the claims are limited and true,” the company said. “The front label claims convey no more information to reasonable consumers than the truthful fact that the MSC did certify the products as sustainable.”
The lawsuit over the sustainability of Conagra’s seafood is one of multiple similar lawsuits that have been filed in recent years, including lawsuits against Mowi, Aldi, and Gorton’s. In a SeafoodSource op-ed, Katten Muchin Rosenman Partner Christopher A. Cole said the lawsuits center around the definition of “sustainable,” as the label falls under legal scrutiny – and cautioned companies to keep an eye on the developing cases.
Pay attention to developing laws, guidance, and cases,” Cole said in his op-ed. “This is a rapidly evolving area and new court opinions or regulatory guidance can have an immediate impact on the risk calculus.”
Photo courtesy of Conagra Brands
