Is that really juice? An analysis of the POM Wonderful v. Coca-Cola false advertising decision and its business implications

摘要

In POM Wonderful v. Coca-Cola, the plaintiff sued the beverage giant under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act for misleading consumers about the amount of pomegranate juice in its MINUTE MAID "Pomegranate Blueberry Juice," comprised of 99.4% apple and grape juices. Rather than substantively address this Lanham Act claim, Coca-Cola ("Coke") sought to dismiss the suit as precluded by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act. This past June, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously held that the regulatory provisions of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA") does not preclude or limit the statutory private right of action provided in the Lanham Act. Instead, they are complementary statutes that provide greater protection to consumers in combination than either could alone.