Description: Lawsuit alleging that Walmart's marketing of plastic and plastic-packaged products as recyclable violated California's Unfair Competition Law.
-
Greenpeace, Inc. v. Walmart Inc.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/10/2022 Order Download Motion to dismiss third amended complaint granted and plaintiff afforded further leave to amend. California Federal Court Found Greenpeace Standing Allegations to Be Deficient in Plastics Suit Against Walmart. The federal district court for the Northern District of California dismissed Greenpeace’s lawsuit alleging that Walmart’s marketing of plastic and plastic-packaged products as recyclable violated California’s Unfair Competition Law. The complaint’s allegations included that plastic pollution “is accompanied by an array of negative side effects,” including emissions of “large amounts of methane.” The court found that Greenpeace failed to sufficiently allege an “informational injury” or an injury based on future diversions of resources for purposes of Article III standing. However, the court granted Greenpeace leave to amend to supplement its standing allegations. 05/06/2022 Reply Download Reply filed in support of motion to dismiss. 03/25/2022 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss third amended complaint filed. 02/22/2022 Order Download Motion to dismiss second amended complaint denied as moot. 02/18/2022 Complaint Download Third amended complaint filed. 12/20/2021 Reply Download Reply filed in support of motion to dismiss. 12/13/2021 Opposition Download Plaintiff filed opposition to motion to dismiss. 11/10/2021 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss filed. 10/15/2021 Complaint Download Second amended complaint filed. 09/20/2021 Order Download Motion to dismiss granted. Federal Court Said Greenpeace Lacked Standing for Claims that Walmart’s Marketing of Plastic Products as Recyclable Violated California Unfair Competition Law. The federal district court for the Northern District of California ruled that Greenpeace did not have standing to bring claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law related to Walmart’s sale of plastic and plastic-packaged products under its private label brands. Greenpeace alleged that Walmart advertised and marketed products and packaging made from plastics #3-7 or unidentified plastic as “recyclable” when they are not recyclable. Greenpeace alleged that consumers “concerned with the proliferation of plastic pollution” and its environmental impact—including methane emissions—actively seek products that are recyclable, and that Walmart’s representations were likely to deceive the public. In addition, Greenpeace alleged that Walmart violated California’s policy against misrepresenting the environmental attributes of products. The court found that none of Greenpeace’s allegations demonstrated that Greenpeace took action in reliance on the truth of Walmart’s representations and that Greenpeace therefore did not meet the Unfair Competition Law’s requirements for standing. The court said Greenpeace could file an amended complaint if it did so by October 15, 2021. 03/29/2021 Complaint Download First amended complaint. -
Greenpeace, Inc. v. Walmart Inc.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/16/2020 Complaint Download Complaint filed.