97 F.4th 525
7th Cir.2024Background
- Plaintiffs are consumers who purchased Abbott Laboratories' infant formula, later recalled after FDA inspections found unsanitary conditions and some bacterial contamination at the Sturgis, Michigan plant.
- In February 2022, after reports of infant illnesses, Abbott voluntarily recalled formula products from the Sturgis facility and offered full refunds to consumers.
- Plaintiffs, seeking class status, sued for economic loss, alleging they would not have paid for the formula if they'd known of the contamination risk.
- Plaintiffs did not allege that any formula they personally purchased was actually contaminated.
- The district court dismissed the claims for lack of Article III standing, and plaintiffs appealed. The personal injury cases are ongoing but were not part of this appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article III Injury-in-Fact | Risk of contamination economically harmed buyers, denying benefit of bargain or causing them to overpay | No actual injury; buyers received what they paid for, and no contamination alleged | No standing: injury is hypothetical |
| Benefit of the Bargain | Paid for safe formula, but got formula at risk of contamination | Products used as intended; refund offered after risk discovered | Risk alone does not equal injury-in-fact |
| Premium Price Theory | Paid a premium price, which would not have paid if risk known | No showing that their product was tainted or valueless | No particularized injury alleged |
| Scope of Defect | Persistent unsanitary conditions plausibly tainted their purchases | No universal defect; only risk, not actual widespread contamination | No plausible claim of universal defect |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (standing requires concrete, particularized, actual or imminent injury)
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (Article III requires plaintiff to clearly allege injury in fact)
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Env’t Servs., 528 U.S. 167 (standing elements)
- In re Aqua Dots Prods. Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 748 (universal, inherent defect supports standing; distinguishes from present case)
- Wallace v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., 747 F.3d 1025 (risk in product line without showing individual product defect insufficient)
- In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Prods. Mktg., Sales Pracs. & Liab. Litig., 903 F.3d 278 (no standing where product worked as expected and plaintiff could not show personal injury)
- Rivera v. Wyeth-Ayerst Labs., 283 F.3d 315 (no standing for economic loss absent personal harm from product)