Trader Joe’s Chocolate Lawsuit Dismissed by San Diego Judge

A judge in San Diego has thrown out most of a lawsuit against Trader Joe’s, which accused the grocery chain of not warning customers about harmful levels of “heavy metals” like lead and cadmium in its dark chocolate bars.

U.S. District Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro ruled that the consumers who filed the lawsuit failed to prove that the chocolate posed an unreasonable risk to safety or was unfit to eat.

She stated that while the lack of warning labels might mislead consumers, simply alleging the presence of heavy metals does not automatically mean they pose a health risk.

The judge dismissed five claims from shoppers across the nation, including violations of California consumer protection laws and an implied warranty of safety. However, she allowed claims from shoppers in Illinois, New York, and Washington to proceed under those states’ laws.

This lawsuit stems from a Consumer Reports study in December 2022 that found high levels of lead, cadmium, or both in dark chocolate bars. These metals can occur naturally in soil and prolonged exposure may lead to health issues, especially for pregnant women and children.

Besides Trader Joe’s, other chocolate sellers like Godiva, Hershey, Lindt, and Mars were also sued over their dark chocolate products.

The lawsuit against Trader Joe’s combined complaints from multiple lawsuits and accused the company of not disclosing levels of lead, cadmium, and arsenic in its dark chocolate bars.

Related Articles:

• Local Teen’s Battle with Lyme Disease: A Warning for Others
• HIV Prevention Meds Available Without Prescription: Governor Newsom’s Decision
• Breaking News: Florida Student Arrested for Bringing Loaded Gun to School Sparks Widespread Safety Concerns

While the plaintiffs have the opportunity to amend their complaint, Trader Joe’s and its lawyers have not yet responded to requests for comment on the judge’s decision.

The case is known as In re Trader Joe’s Company Dark Chocolate Litigation and is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California under case number 23-00061.