Blue Diamond Class Action: Are Your Nut Thins Mostly Air?

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Blue Diamond Growers, alleging that the packaging for Nut Thins crackers is deceptive due to excessive slack-fill (empty space). The lawsuit claims the boxes are 60% empty, misleading consumers into believing they are getting more product than they actually are.

Consumers Affected: Consumers who purchased Blue Diamond Nut Thins crackers.

Reason for Lawsuit: Allegations of deceptive packaging practices and violation of the Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act (ADTPA), causing financial harm to consumers.

Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama Western Division.

Blue Diamond Growers sells almond and rice cheddar cheese flavored crackers in boxes that are significantly larger than the actual contents, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

Plaintiff Dana Ravizee filed the class action complaint against Blue Diamond on June 10 in an Alabama federal court, alleging violations of the Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act (ADTPA).

According to the lawsuit, the packaging on Nut Thins crackers is opaque, preventing consumers from seeing the true amount of product inside, and realizing the box is more than half-empty.

Blue Diamond Nut Thins Lawsuit Claims Cracker Boxes Are 60% Air

Measurements indicate that the boxes are 60% empty, with only 39.8% of the space filled with crackers, the lawsuit claims. 

“The relatively small amount of crackers has been noticed by purchasers of the cheddar cheese and other varieties, which are packaged and labeled similarly,” the lawsuit says.  

Customer complaints online have highlighted the discrepancy between the packaging size and the actual product quantity, Ravizee says.

For example, one buyer said he was very disappointed. “I paid almost $4 for this box of crackers. It was a tiny little box with barely a handful of crackers in it and I paid $4 for this. I feel like I’ve been ripped off,” he reportedly said. 

No Reason For Boxes To Be So Empty, Lawsuit Says

Ravizee alleges deceptive packaging has resulted in financial harm to consumers who believed they were getting better value for their money.

She also claims the packaging does not require such excessive empty space for protection and that smaller packaging could effectively house the crackers without damaging them. 

Ravizee says Blue Diamond Growers should reduce the box size or increase the fill level to eliminate deception.

Lawsuit Highlights Longstanding Problem of "Slack-Fill" in Food Packaging

Slack fill refers to the empty space in packaging that serves no functional or protective purpose. Federal laws like the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act prohibit containers made, formed, or filled in a misleading manner. 

But many companies continue to use excessive slack fill, misleading consumers into believing they are getting more product than they actually are, Ravizee says. 

The lawsuit lays out a short history of consumer protection law in order to make the point that deceptive packaging is not a new issue. In the late 1800s, consumers faced fraud primarily related to weights and measures when purchasing goods in bulk. However, as urbanization and new technologies emerged, packaging fraud evolved, it says. 

“Unscrupulous” manufacturers began selling products in containers that appeared to hold more than they actually did, the lawsuit says. They realized that most consumers did not pay attention to quantitative information on packaging, leading to the practice of “slack filling.”

In the Blue Diamond Nut Thins slack-fill class action lawsuit, Ravizee is looking to represent anyone in Alabama who bought the crackers. She is seeking certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs, and a jury trial under the ADTPA.

In 2020, McCormick & Co. agreed to pay $2.5 million to settle multidistrict litigation that accused it of deceptively underfilling the pepper it sells in grinders and tins.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Ravizee v. Blue Diamond Growers
• Case Number: 7:24-cv-00759-ACA 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama Western Division

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Charles M. Thompson (Charles M. Thompson P.C.)