Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Consumers brought a class action alleging that Barilla’s use of “Italy’s #1 Brand of Pasta” on packaging misled buyers into believing the pasta was made in Italy. Barilla sought summary judgment, and the parties also litigated expert evidence and class certification.
The case required the court to assess the label in the context of the packaging and the evidence of how reasonable consumers understood it.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted summary judgment to Barilla, concluding that the challenged phrase identified Barilla as a leading Italian brand rather than representing that the product was manufactured in Italy. The record did not support actionable deception.
Because no deceptive conduct remained, the derivative unjust-enrichment claim also failed. The court partly granted a motion to strike consumer-perception opinions and denied the remaining expert and class motions as moot.
Key Takeaways
- Product-label language is evaluated in the context of the full packaging.
- A statement about a brand’s national identity is not necessarily a statement of manufacturing origin.
- Consumer-perception evidence must reliably address the challenged representation.
- Unjust enrichment fails when the alleged underlying deception fails.
Why It Matters
The decision offers useful guidance for food companies and consumer counsel evaluating origin claims. Context, wording, and reliable perception evidence remain central at summary judgment.