United States Third Circuit

In a class action alleging that Snapple products were deceptively labeled, district court judgment is reversed where: 1) defendant waived its express preemption argument; 2) implied field preemption does not apply as neither Congress nor the FDA intended to occupy the fields of food and beverage labeling and juice products; and 3) implied conflict preemption does not apply as there is no FDA policy with which state law could conflict since neither the FDA policy statement nor the FDA's letter regarding the term "natural" have the force of law required to preempt conflicting state law.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/24/2009
• Decided 08/12/2009
• Published 08/12/2009

Judges

• Before:  BARRY, SMITH, Circuit Judges and RESTANI, Judge.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Lynne M. KizisDaniel Lapinski (Argued), Philip A. Tortoreti, Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, Woodbridge, NJ, Michael D. Halbfish, Tunney & Halfbish, Woodbridge, NJ, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Van H. Beckwith (Argued), Jeffrey A. Lamken, Michael G. Pattillo, Jr., Martin V. Totaro, Baker Botts, Washington, DC, for Appellee.