Class Action Challenges Ziploc Bag ‘Unbeatable’ Protection, Freshness Claims [DISMISSED]

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action alleges consumers have been misled by the claim that Ziploc bags with “Power Shield” and “Grip ‘n Seal” technology offer unbeatable protection and freshness.

The 14-page case in Illinois alleges that the tests on which defendant S.C. Johnson & Son bases the “unbeatable protection” tag are misleading in that they are “not relevant and/or of limited applicability” to how a regular consumer would use the Ziploc bags. Similarly, the suit alleges the moisture loss test the company uses to back its “unbeatable freshness” claim ignores a number of ways a food product can spoil aside from loss of moisture. 

Overall, S.C. Johnson & Son has deceived consumers by failing to prominently describe and explain the tests’ standards, the complaint claims. 

“Reasonable consumers must and do rely on a company to honestly identify and describe the components, attributes, and features of a product, relative to itself and other comparable products or alternatives,” the suit argues. “The value of the Product that Plaintiff purchased was materially less than its value as represented by defendant.” 

According to the lawsuit, a consumer who sees the defendant’s “Power Shield Technology – Unbeatable Protection” claim expects the Ziploc bags to offer best-in-class protection for whatever they put inside the product. In the upper right-hand corner of the Ziploc bags’ packaging appear the words “Stronger* Than Hefty,” followed by “On Punctures and Tears” in smaller black text underneath, the case says. 

Per the suit, the asterisk in the “Stronger* Than Hefty” claim refers to a disclaimer on the back of the Ziploc box that states “Bag film tested using ASTM D1709 Dart Drop and ASTM D2582 PPT,” the standard test method used by global standards organization ASTM for impact resistance of plastic film by the free-falling dart method and the standard test for puncture-propagation tear resistance of plastic film and thin sheeting, respectively.

The lawsuit contends, however, that S.C. Johnson & Son’s reliance on these tests is “misleading,” in part because the ASTM standards and their limitations are not prominently described or explained to consumers. The case charges that although the small print in the corner of the Ziploc packaging “attempts to qualify” the unbeatable protection claim by limiting it to punctures and tears, consumers are “unlikely to connect the two statements” given their proximity to each other on the box and lack of a link between the two claims.

“Instead, consumers will expect the Product to be made with the most resilient plastic, contain the strongest seal possible, will expand the most, and keep out all air,” the filing says.

 Moreover, the case contends that although the defendant’s “Unbeatable Freshness” claim, which can be found on packages of Ziploc bags made with “Grip ‘n Seal” technology, suggests to buyers that the product is superior to similar items, the moisture loss test on which S.C. Johnson & Son bases the boast is “misleading for various reasons.” As the lawsuit tells it, the moisture loss test, during which a Ziploc bag containing sliced bread is weighed before and after a 24-hour period, centers on only one way a food can spoil, and one criterion for evaluating a food’s freshness. 

Some spoilage criteria not taken into account by S.C. Johnson & Son’s test includes enzymatic activity, lipid oxidation, fat crystallization, freezer burn, starch retrogradation and sugar crystallization, as well as storage variables such as oxygen, humidity, temperature, light, handling and oxidation, the lawsuit states. 

“The claim of unbeatable freshness is misleading because it misleads consumers who do not know advanced chemistry about food preservation to think its Product will be useful in all circumstances, when it will not,” the lawsuit alleges. “No single type of storage device can preserve freshness for the range of foods that consumers would put in the bags.” 

The case looks to represent consumers in Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Rhode Island, Georgia, North Dakota, Texas, New Mexico, North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Oklahoma who bought plastic Ziploc bags within the applicable statute of limitations period. 

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.