Bigelow Tea Class Action Heads To Trial Over "Made in USA" Claims

A class action lawsuit against Bigelow Tea is proceeding to trial after a federal judge ruled that the company's "Made in the USA" claim on its tea products is misleading, as the tea leaves are grown and processed overseas.

Consumers Affected: Consumers who purchased Bigelow Tea products labeled as "Manufactured in the USA."

Reason for Lawsuit: Allegations of deceptive labeling and false advertising, as the tea's origin and processing do not align with the "Made in the USA" claim.

Court: The case was filed and is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

bags of Bigelow tea

Judge Rules "Made in the USA" Claim on Tea Misleading

RC Bigelow Inc., a prominent tea company, is heading to trial over allegations that its products are misleadingly labeled as "manufactured in the USA." A federal judge ruled this claim is "literally false" since the tea is grown and processed overseas. 

The judge's decision means the case will proceed to trial, focusing on whether the company's labeling was deceptive and if consumers were misled. 

Bigelow Sued Over Tea Origin Claims

Originally filed in California federal court in 2020, the class action lawsuit against R.C. Bigelow, Inc. accuses  the tea company of misleading consumers by claiming its products were "manufactured in the USA." Plaintiffs Kimberly Banks and Carol Cantwell targeted Bigelow's use of phrases like "Manufactured in the USA 100% American Family Owned" and "America's Classic" on its packaging.

Banks and Cantwell argued that these claims were deceptive because Bigelow's teas, including popular varieties like Earl Grey Black Tea, English Teatime Black Tea, and Green Tea with Ginger, were actually grown and processed abroad in countries like Sri Lanka and India. Despite owning a tea plantation in South Carolina, the company did not source any of its packaged tea domestically.

A central issue in the case is how consumers interpret the term "manufactured." Bigelow contended that it referred solely to the tea bags, which are produced in the U.S., while the plaintiffs argued that consumers understand it to encompass the entire manufacturing process, including the processing of the tea leaves themselves. 

In July 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) established a stricter rule for "Made in the USA" claims, requiring that "all or virtually all" of a product's components be made and sourced in the United States. However, this rule came after the class action lawsuit against R.C. Bigelow.

Bigelow argued for the lawsuit's dismissal, claiming that consumers understand very little tea is grown in the U.S. and that "manufactured in the USA" refers to the blending, packaging, labeling, and formulating done domestically. This stance contrasts with the FTC's later ruling emphasizing the origin of all product components, not just the final processing.

Federal Judge Sides with Consumers, Rules Claim "Literally False"

This conflict between Bigelow's interpretation and the FTC's ruling sets the stage for the recent legal development in the case. Last week, a federal judge granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs. The court rejected Bigelow's argument that the "manufactured in the USA" claim on its packaging referred only to the tea bags, not the tea leaves themselves.

Judge Pregerson emphasized that the tea leaves are "the very essence of the tea bag" and that consumers purchase tea bags for the tea, not merely the packaging. Since the tea leaves are grown and processed abroad, the judge concluded that the "Manufactured in the USA" statement was literally false.

This ruling aligns with the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) perspective on "Made in USA" claims, which requires that "all or virtually all" of a product must be made in the United States to justify such a claim. Although not explicitly mentioned in the decision, the court's analysis mirrors the FTC's approach to consumer understanding of these claims.

The class action lawsuit will now proceed to trial on other remaining issues, but this ruling sets a significant precedent for future cases involving "Made in USA" labeling disputes.

Case Details

  • Lawsuit: Banks et al v. R.C. Bigelow Inc.
  • Case Number: 2:20-cv-06208-DDP-RAO
  • Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

  • Todd M. Schneider and Jason H. Kim (Schneider Wallace Cottrell Konecky LLP)
  • Aubry Wand (The Wand Law Firm PC)
Latest News

Loading...

Illustration of a mobile device getting an email notification
Our Mission at Injury Claims

Injury Claims keeps you informed about lawsuits large and small that could affect your daily life. We simplify the complexities of class actions lawsuits, open class action settlements, mass torts, and individual cases to ensure you understand how these legal matters could impact your rights and interests.

Legal Updates That Matter to You

If you think a recent legal case might affect you, action is required. Select a class action lawsuit or class action settlement, share your details, and connect with a qualified attorney who will explain your legal options and assist in pursuing any compensation due. Take the first step now to secure your rights.