In re Nurture Baby Food Litigation
- Vyskocil
- 1:21-cv-01217
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Nurture Baby Food Litigation: Judge Vyskocil denied the motions without prejudice after questioning the court’s power to hear the case.
The plaintiffs and Nurture, Inc. are affected because their pending motions were denied without prejudice, while the parties will have an opportunity to address whether the court has subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
In re Nurture Baby Food Litigation is a consolidated class case in which plaintiffs allege that Nurture, Inc. failed to disclose heavy metals and other contaminants in its baby food. They bring claims under consumer-protection laws and common law in the states where they reside.
The court reviewed whether it had the power to hear the case based on the allegations in the consolidated complaint. The court found an apparent problem with that power but did not decide whether the court ultimately has jurisdiction.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil denied without prejudice Nurture’s motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs’ motion to strike a declaration, and the related motions for oral argument. The court will give the parties an opportunity to address whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, and the clerk was directed to close the pending motions.
The detailed version
- In re Nurture Baby Food Litigation · No. 1:21-cv-01217
- Vyskocil
- Mar. 27, 2024
Background
Plaintiffs brought this consolidated case individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. They allege that Nurture, Inc. failed to properly disclose heavy metals and other contaminants in its baby food, violating consumer-protection statutes and common-law rules in the states where the plaintiffs reside.
Jurisdiction Review
The court independently reviewed whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the legal power to hear the case. Based on the allegations in the consolidated class-action complaint, the court identified an apparent lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order does not decide that jurisdiction is absent; instead, it states that the parties will have an opportunity to address whether jurisdiction exists. The court said it would enter a scheduling order for that purpose.
Rulings
The court denied without prejudice Nurture’s motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. It also denied without prejudice the plaintiffs’ motion to strike the Declaration of Nega Beru and the related motions for oral argument. The clerk was directed to close the motions listed at docket entries 162, 166, 174, and 178. The order does not resolve the underlying claims about the baby food or state whether the court ultimately has subject-matter jurisdiction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.