Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Case Name (Date)

Wood et al. v. Blue Diamond Growers
23-cv-1363, D. Md.
(May 2023)

Zapadinsky et al. v. Blue Diamond Growers
23-cv-231, E.D. Wis.
(Feb. 2023)

Product/Service

Allegations

Misleadingly marketing products as “smokehouse” when they are not made in a smokehouse and the flavor comes from an added liquid smoke flavor

Status

Wood case: Dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.

Zapadinsky case: Dismissed

Class-Action Tracker

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Class Action

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that the flavor in products comes from being smoked over a fire of wood chips

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Class Action

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as “Smokehouse Almonds”

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Class Action

Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as “smokehouse”

Blue Diamond Habanero BBQ Almonds

Class Action

Blue Diamond Habanero BBQ Almonds

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that one of the characterizing flavors in products comes from habanero chili peppers when they contain a relatively small amounts of the ingredient

Almond Breeze Almondmilk Vanilla Yogurt Alternative

Class Action

Almond Breeze Almondmilk Vanilla Yogurt Alternative

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing yogurt as “vanilla with other natural flavors” when the ingredients list shows that the product contains more “Natural Flavors” than vanilla extract

Almond Breeze Vanilla Almondmilk

Class Action

Almond Breeze Vanilla Almondmilk

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as containing vanilla when the ingredient list does not include vanilla but rather discloses that the products contain unspecified “Natural Flavor”

Almond Breeze Almond Coconut Blend