Boxes of Barilla Pasta

May 2021: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed.

July 2020: The Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the decision to approve the settlement agreement concluding that the district court erred in certifying the class because injunctive relief would not provide a remedy for all of the class members. The case was remanded for further proceedings. (Berni et al v. Barilla S.P.A. et al, Case No. 19-1921, 2nd Cir.)

July 2019: An objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the approval of the settlement.

June 2019: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement.

June 2018: A federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement agreement in which Barilla agreed to include a disclaimer and a minimum fill line on packages of specialty pastas containing less than one pound of pasta. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for December 17, 2018.

July 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Barilla for allegedly deceptively packaging its pastas. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company deceptively uses the same size boxes for its regular and specialized pastas when the boxes actually contain different amounts of pasta. For example, the box of regular elbow-shaped pasta has 16 ounces of pasta, the box of ProteinPLUS elbows has 14.5 ounces of pasta, and the box of Whole Grain elbows has 13.25 ounces of pasta. (Berni et al v. Barilla S.p.A., Barilla America Inc., and Barilla USA, Case No. 16-cv-4196, E.D.N.Y.)

For more information about You know when you buy a big bag of chips, and you’re all psyched for a feast, and then it turns out there are like, three chips in the bag? That bag is slack filled.ed packaging and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.

For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding pasta and TINA.org’s coverage of the products, click here.