Trisvan v. Nestle Purina Pet Care Company
1:24-cv-04028
E.D.N.YMay 22, 2025Background
- John Trisvan, proceeding pro se, sued Nestle Purina Petcare Company alleging his pets died after suffering allergic reactions from eating Purina food.
- Trisvan claimed the Purina food contained toxic materials causing serious health problems in animals, ultimately leading to their deaths.
- He asserted claims under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), and also appeared to assert state-law negligence and failure-to-warn claims.
- Trisvan sought to proceed in forma pauperis (without paying fees), which the court granted solely for the purpose of reviewing his complaint.
- The court dismissed his complaint for failure to state a federal claim and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims, finding diversity jurisdiction insufficiently pleaded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private right under FDCA | FDCA violations for toxic/unsafe pet food | No private right to sue under FDCA | No private right of action under FDCA; claim dismissed |
| Private right under CPSA | Purina failed to inform public of risks as required by CPSA | No private right to sue under CPSA | No private right of action; even if so, insufficient facts |
| Sufficiency of CPSA pleading | Purina did not warn the public or authorities about the risks | Not specified | Failed to allege Purina knowingly failed to warn CPSC |
| Supplemental jurisdiction over state claims | State claims allege negligence, failure-to-warn | Not specified | Court declined jurisdiction; diversity jurisdiction not shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard for plausibility of claims)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (distinguishing factual allegations from legal conclusions at motion to dismiss)
- PDK Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105 (no private right of action under the FDCA)
- Drake v. Honeywell, 797 F.2d 603 (no private right of action under the CPSA)
- Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 (declining supplemental jurisdiction after dismissal of federal claims)