Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Diet Soda Lawsuit Fizzles Out

By Lawrence Weinstein, Jeffrey Warshafsky & Russell Kostelak on April 30, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Recently, a plaintiff’s purported class action against Diet Dr. Pepper went flat when a California federal judge held that the term “Diet” alone on a soft drink label does not constitute a claim that the soft drink will assist in weight loss.

In Becerra v. Dr. Pepper/Seven Up, Inc., Plaintiff Shana Becerra brought a putative class action in the Northern District of California against Dr. Pepper, claiming the prominent display of the term “diet” on the Diet Dr. Pepper label falsely indicated that the product would contribute to healthy weight management and would not cause her to gain weight.  2018 WL 1569697 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 2018).  Instead, Becerra alleged that the use of artificial sweeteners in Diet Dr. Pepper actually caused her to gain weight.Judge William H. Orrick dismissed Becerra’s claim, holding that nothing on the label, packaging, or advertising of Diet Dr. Pepper would suggest to a reasonable consumer that Diet Dr. Pepper will help a consumer with weight loss or healthy weight management.  Rather, the court held, a reasonable consumer would know that the term “diet” on the Diet Dr. Pepper label is simply used to denote a lower calorie version of the standard Dr. Pepper soft drink.  From the term “diet,” a reasonable consumer has no basis to infer anything more than the fact that the soft drink is calorie-free; that term, standing alone, does not imply that the soft drink has any benefit for weight loss or weight management.

Judge Orrick dismissed Becerra’s complaint without prejudice, granting her leave to amend.  The court warned Becerra, however, that the scientific studies she cited in her complaint to support her allegation that the aspartame in Diet Dr. Pepper caused weight gain were insufficient to state a claim.  The studies did not establish any causation between aspartame and weight gain.  At best, these studies merely evidenced a correlation between weight gain and the consumption of artificial sweeteners like aspartame.  Because Becerra failed to cite a single study that found a causative link between aspartame and weight gain, this provided a separate basis to dismiss her claim.

A materially identical suit was also brought against the maker of Dr. Pepper by two New York consumers in the Southern District of New York.  Relying on Judge Orrick’s decision and another California decision involving another brand of soft drink, Judge Daniels of  the Southern District of New York dismissed this suit without prejudice in an April 18, 2018 summary order.  Although both dismissals were without prejudice, it is difficult to conceive how either case can plausibly be revived.  Watch this space for further developments.

***

Want to talk advertising? We welcome your questions, ideas, and thoughts on our posts. Email or call us at lweinstein@proskauer.com /212-969-3240 or akaplan@proskauer.com /212-969-3671.  We are editors of Proskauer on Advertising Law and partners in Proskauer’s False Advertising & Trademark practice.

Photo of Jeffrey Warshafsky Jeffrey Warshafsky

Jeff Warshafsky is a partner in the Litigation Department. A versatile commercial litigator and strategic advisor, Jeff specializes in consumer class actions, sports litigation, false advertising, trademark, and other intellectual property disputes.

Jeff defends companies in connection with consumer class actions involving advertising…

Jeff Warshafsky is a partner in the Litigation Department. A versatile commercial litigator and strategic advisor, Jeff specializes in consumer class actions, sports litigation, false advertising, trademark, and other intellectual property disputes.

Jeff defends companies in connection with consumer class actions involving advertising and privacy issues. He has handled dozens of class actions around the country for multinational companies across diverse sectors including consumer product companies, retailers, and sports leagues. Jeff also counsels clients to avoid being targeted in such actions, helps them respond to demand letters from plaintiffs’ counsel, and negotiates resolutions.

Additionally, Jeff represents clients in competitor versus competitor advertising disputes, including in Lanham Act cases and advertising self-regulation disputes before the National Advertising Division and the National Advertising Review Board. He also counsels companies on advertising substantiation issues, with an emphasis on complex scientific testing, such as clinical trials and sensory testing. Jeff regularly advises major sports leagues on complex business disputes.

Jeff maintains a robust pro bono immigration practice, assisting clients with asylum and U-Visa applications and in connection with removal proceedings. In addition to his active practice, Jeff is an editor of and contributor to the Firm’s false advertising blog, Watch This Space: Proskauer on Advertising Law.

Read more about Jeffrey WarshafskyEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    Proskauer on Advertising Law
  • Organization:
    Proskauer Rose LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo