Plastics Litigation Tracker

Allegations: Plaintiff, Darryl Keith Rosencrants, brought a securities class action against Danimer Scientific, Inc. (a company that produces a biodegradable plastic alternative) and its officers, seeking damages under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Plaintiff alleged that Defendants violated federal securities law by making false and misleading statements about the company's product, including by overstating the product's biodegradability. Filed 5/14/2021. See complaint here.

Status: Pending as of 7/29/2023. A motion to dismiss was filed by Defendant on May 31, 2022. A supplemental document was filed on September 6, 2022 to support the previously filed motion to dismiss, requesting oral argument. The case was reassigned to a new judge in January 2023. The court has not yet responded to Defendant's motion.

Allegations: Plaintiff, an environmental non-profit, alleges that Gelson's Markets continues to sell non-recyclable plastic grocery bags to consumers despite a California law requiring that all plastic reusable grocery bags be recyclable. Plaintiff seeks an order enjoining Defendant's unlawful conduct. Filed 6/3/2022. See complaint here.

Status: Pending. A hearing was scheduled for 6/15/2023. As of July 2023, per the docket, there are no updates concerning the hearing or a next court date.

Allegations: Plaintiff, the State of Minnesota, led by its AG Keith Ellison, is seeking relief to sue for injunctive relief Defendants, Reynold Consumer Products, Inc., and Walmart Inc., for selling Hefty recycling trash bags that were falsely advertised as recyclable. Filed 06/06/2023. See complaint here.

Outcome: This case is pending.

Allegations: Plaintiff, a non-profit dedicated to ending plastic pollution, alleges that Defendant continues to sell non-recyclable plastic bags despite the California law banning the sale of non-recyclable plastic bags. Plaintiff seeks an order enjoining Defendant's unlawful conduct. Filed 6/3/2022. See complaint here.

Status: Pending. On April 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, which was granted by the court on June 22, 2023. The second amended complaint was filed on June 28, 2023. On July 31, 2023, the court filed a general denial.

Allegations: Plaintiff represents a class alleging that Defendant, Walgreen Co., continues to sell non-recyclable plastic bags despite a California law (SB 270) banning the sale of non-recyclable plastic bags. The class seeks an order enjoining Defendant's unlawful conduct, as well as damages to compensate them for the deceptive practices. Filed 4/29/2022. See complaint here.

Status: Pending. On October 7, 2022, Walgreen Co. filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. On December 19, 2022, the court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss as to Plaintiff's cause of action alleging the commission of unlawful acts based on Defendant's alleged violation of SB 270, but denied the the motion on all other grounds. On February 17, 2023, Defendant's attorney withdrew their appearance and representation. On April 11, 2023, a new Attorney submitted a request to represent Defendant in this case. On July 18, 2023 an amended motion for leave was filed for a new attorney to be added to the case. This case is pending.

Allegations: Plaintiff, a health non-profit, is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent and restrain Defendant’s from continuing to violate the Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) for long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate (“LCPFAC”) chemical substances. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to submit a significant new use notice (SNUN) and for manufacturing the chemical without completing the requisite. Filed 12/27/22. See complaint here.

Outcome: Closed. On March 6, 2023, a motion to dismiss the complaint was filed by the Defendant. On April 6, 2023, the court granted Defendant's motion and dismissed the case without prejudice. The court found that Plaintiff's suit was statutorily precluded because the United States filed a civil lawsuit based on the same conduct eight days before Plaintiffs did. See the opinion here.

Allegations: Plaintiff, Kathleen Smith, brought a class action suit against Keurig Green Mountain, Inc., seeking injunctive relief. Plaintiff sought to enjoin Defendant's misleading advertising practices and other unlawful conduct, and also sought an award of damages. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant violated California's legislatively declared policy against misrepresenting the characteristics of goods and services. Plaintiff also argued that Defendant had violated the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and caused damages through reliance on Defendants false representations by falsely labeling their products (single serve coffee pods) as recyclable. Filed 11/02/18. See complaint here.

Outcome: Closed. The court granted Plaintiff's motion for class certification. On February 24, 2022, the parties filed a settlement agreement, which stated that Keurig cannot label, market, advertise, or otherwise represent the cups as recyclable without "clearly and prominently including a revised qualifying statement." Other terms included requirements for the qualifying language, changes to Keurig's website and other advertising, and a $10 million proposed settlement. As of February 27, 2023, the court issued an order granting final approval of the class action settlement and granting Plaintiff's motion for attorneys fees, costs, and incentive awards.

Allegations: Plaintiffs, an environmental group, filed an action against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, challenging a permit pertaining to shellfish aquaculture. Plaintiffs argued that the permits "must be invalidated" because the approved practice could result in plastics being introduced into the waterways in violation of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Filed 12/20/21. See complaint here.

Status: Closed. The district court awarded summary judgment to the plaintiffs. On appeal, the 9th Circuit Court affirmed, holding that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' analysis was insufficient because it relied on a study that examined only one type of shellfish and failed to consider a variety of natural resources and environmental stressors. (No. 20-35547). On December 20, 2021 the Coalition filed a second complaint in the Western District of Washington at Seattle. The complaint challenged the Corps’ failure to comply with (1) NEPA; (2) CWA; (3) the Endangered Species Act; (4) the Rivers and Harbors Act; and/or (5) the Administrative Procedure Act. As of June 10, 2022, the district court judge granted Plaintiffs’ motion to file a second amended complaint. On February 13, 2023, the court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss.

Allegations: Plaintiffs, David Swartz, Cristina Salgado, and Marcelo Muto, brought a class action against Coca-Cola Co., Bluetriton Brands, Inc., and Niagara Bottling, LLC (plastic bottle producers), seeking an injunction precluding the sale of plastic bottled water, unless the products' packaging and marketing are modified to remove "100% recyclable" and to disclose currently-omitted facts about their recyclability. Plaintiffs also sought damages for the difference between the price that consumers paid for the products and the price that they would have paid but for Defendants' misrepresentations. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants' marketing violated California's public policy on environmental marketing claims, the Federal Trade Commission Green Guides, and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act because the "100% Recyclable" marketing was false. Filed 6/16/21. See complaint here.

Status: Pending as of 8/8/2023. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on 01/09/2023. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion on 1/30/2023. On 2/13/2023, Coca-Cola filed an additional Motion to Dismiss. On July 27, 2023, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's amended complaint.

Allegations: Plaintiff, a citizens group, brought this case against Formosa Plastics Corp., seeking a declaratory judgment, as well as monetary and injunctive relief. Plaintiff alleged that plastic pellets were being illegally dumped into Texas waterways without a permit, in violation of permits under the Clean Water Act (CWA). Filed on 7/31/2017. See complaint here.

Status: Closed. The court affirmed Plaintiff's claim for declaratory judgment and issued monetary and injunctive relief against Defendant, with a focus on future permit violations. The court also awarded attorney's fees and sanctions for past violations. The parties agreed to a $50 million settlement over the CWA claims. Following the settlement agreement, the parties disagreed over whether Formosa's payment and reporting obligations are triggered only on a "new discharge" of plastics or on "visual detection" of plastics irrespective of when those plastics had actually been discharged from Formosa properties. On March 21, 2022, the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Texas, Victoria Division, rejected Formosa’s request to pause the cleanup of waterways, and ruled that the consent decree that was signed mandates that decontamination must continue until decontamination efforts do more harm than good. On September 8, 2022, Plaitiff's motion to seal Defendant's trial exhibits was granted. As of January 26, 2023, the case has been closed.