Nestle, Danone, Hero Exit Baby Food Heavy Metals Litigation

A federal judge allowed the foreign corporate parents of baby food companies to leave litigation alleging the baby food products contain levels of heavy metals that can cause developmental disorders in children.

Nestlé SA, Hero AG, and Danone SA were dismissed from the multi-district litigation because the plaintiffs couldn’t show they were directly involved in their subsidiaries’ heavy metal testing processes, the US District Court for the Northern District of California said Wednesday. The companies are respectively parents of Gerber, Beech-Nut, and Nurture.

Though the plaintiffs said references to foreign parent company names were rife in company documents, the mere references to the parent companies’ branding doesn’t indicate they were involved in the subsidiaries’ safety processes, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said.

For example, online statements calling Danone a “global food company” are merely “collective marketing and do not establish personal jurisdiction over the parent entity,” she said.

Corley rejected the plaintiffs’ bid for jurisdictional discovery and said they didn’t explain what new information could be uncovered.

The Campbell’s Co., a former domestic parent of Plum PBC, also exited the litigation because the plaintiffs didn’t show Campbell directly participated in setting heavy metal criteria or product testing, Corley said.

Though the plaintiffs said Campbell gave Congress a report of heavy metal testing, that report “only establishes Campbell possessed that information at some point,” the judge noted.

Sun-Maid Growers of California, which became the parent of Plum in 2021, was dismissed from the litigation because the plaintiffs similarly failed to allege it was involved in heavy metal testing and had a duty to act.

Manufacturer defendants couldn’t exit the litigation because the plaintiffs adequately pleaded their manufacturing defect, the judge said. Corley rejected the manufacturing defendant’s argument that the plaintiffs had to allege a specific amount of heavy metals that could cause autism spectrum disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Unlike other cases where plaintiffs argued the presence of heavy metals could be toxic and could have adverse health effects, the plaintiffs here alleged concrete injuries in the form of actually developing those disorders as a result of consuming the defendants’ baby food, Corley said.

Additionally, the plaintiffs met the elements of manufacturing defect claims by laying out a plausible theory that the manufacturers didn’t consistently adhere to their heavy metal specifications in ingredients or completed products.

The plaintiffs are represented by Wagstaff Law Firm and Wisner Baum LLP. Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP represents Hero; Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz represents Danone; and Mayer Brown LLP represents Nestlé, among others.

The case is In re Baby Food Prods. Liab. Litig., N.D. Cal., No. 3:24-md-03101, 4/2/25.