Reynolds Wrap Faces Lawsuit Over 'Made in U.S.A.' Claims

Zulaika Mayfield, a California resident, has recently filed a class-action lawsuit against Reynolds Consumer Products LLC, the company known for its popular aluminum foil brand, Reynolds Wrap. The dispute centers around the company's claim that its product is "Made in U.S.A." Mayfield alleges that the claim is misleading, as the raw materials used in the product are sourced from outside the United States.

According to the complaint, the defendant's product is labeled with the words "FOIL MADE IN U.S.A." The raw material in question is bauxite, a sedimentary rock with a high aluminum content, which is the primary source of aluminum worldwide. Mayfield alleges that the bauxite used in Reynolds Wrap is not sourced from the United States, thus making the claim of "Made in U.S.A." deceptive to consumers.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the government agency responsible for consumer protection and the elimination and prevention of anticompetitive business practices, has clear guidelines on what constitutes a "Made in the U.S.A." claim. According to the FTC, for a product to be considered "Made in U.S.A." without qualification, the product must be "all or virtually all" made in the United States. This means that all significant parts and processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin.

Mayfield's lawsuit alleges that Reynolds Consumer Products LLC's claim violates these guidelines, and by extension, violates California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). These laws are designed to protect consumers from deceptive business practices and false advertising.

The Unfair Competition Law, for example, prohibits any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice. The False Advertising Law, on the other hand, prohibits any untrue or misleading advertising. The Consumers Legal Remedies Act provides a list of "unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices" and provides consumers with a course of action in cases where these have been violated.

In her lawsuit, Mayfield seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of profits, monetary damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Declaratory relief refers to a judgment from a court defining the legal relationship between parties and their rights in a matter before the court. Injunctive relief is a court-ordered act or prohibition of an act. Restitution and disgorgement of profits would mean the return of any profits made from the alleged deceptive practices.

The lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff defines the class as all persons in California who purchased the product from the beginning of the applicable liability period to the present. It remains to be seen how the court will rule on this matter, but it is clear that the outcome could have significant implications for both Reynolds Consumer Products LLC and consumers nationwide.

‍