$2.5M Ferrara Candy Slack-Fill Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Ferrara Candy class action settlement “if you are a resident of the United States who purchased one or more cardboard boxes” of any flavors or varieties of the following candies between February 21, 2013 and June 21, 2018:

  • Jujyfruits
  • Jujubes
  • Now & Later
  • Lemonhead
  • Applehead
  • Cherryhead
  • Grapehead
  • RedHots
  • Trolli
  • Chuckles
  • Black Forest
  • Jawbuster
  • Jawbreaker
  • Brach’s
  • Boston Baked Beans
  • Super Bubble
  • Rainblo
  • Atomic Fireball

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $2,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • 50 cents per product purchased

Class Members with proof of purchase may submit a claim for $0.50 per box for each product purchased. Class Members who do not have a purchase receipt, and who submit a valid claim, will be entitled to a maximum refund of $0.50 per box for up to 15 boxes, totaling $7.50.

Note: “These amounts will be increased proportionally (pro rata) if the total amount of claims does not exhaust the available settlement funds.”


Proof of Purchase

  • N/A; however if you do not submit proof of purchase, you can only claim a maximum cash refund of $7.50.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Ferrara Candy Settlement Notes

  • Thomas Iglesias v. Ferrara Candy Co.
  • Case No. 3:17-cv-00849-VC
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

In February 2017, plaintiff Thomas Iglesias filed this class action lawsuit against Ferrara Candy Co. over allegations the candy maker engages in the practice of slack-filling their products.

Haven’t heard of Ferrara Candy Co.? You’ve probably consumed their products. They make Jujyfruit, Jujubes, Now & Later, Lemonhead, RedHot, and Boston Baked Beans just to name a few.

Specifically, the lawsuit contends that the Ferrara candy products’ oversized packaging deceived consumers into believing they are receiving more candy than they actually receive due to the presence of nonfunctional empty space, or “slack-fill”.

Ferrara is not the only company to be accused of this reportedly deceptive practices as of late. Herbal Zen Nutrition, Knor Pasta Sides, and the makers of Junior Mints are just a few of the companies that have been named in class action lawsuits involving allegations of deceptive slack-fill packaging practices.

Ferrara denies any wrongdoing or liability. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the Ferrara Candy settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to or exclude themselves from the Ferrara Candy settlement must do so by September 20, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit a claim form on or before September 20, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 9/20/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 9/20/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 10/25/18: Final Hearing at 10:00 am PT* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.FerraraCandySettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Ferrara Candy Claims Administrator, Digital Settlement Group LLC, 8001 Broadway, Suite 200, Merrillville, IN 46410
  • Phone: 1-877-452-8477
  • Email: info@FerraraCandySettlement.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo Products Underfilled By 40%, Class Action Says

The maker of Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo products is facing a consumer class action lawsuit alleging customers aren’t getting what they are paying for because the products are 40 percent empty space.

When plaintiff Kaveh Fasih purchased a Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo product back in January in San Diego, she expected to receive a full container of the product. Instead she was surprised and disappointed when she opened the Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo to discover that the container was nearly half-empty, or slack-fill. Seeking to hold Unilever, the maker of Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo, accountable for this alleged intentional deception, Faish decided to take legal action.

“Had Plaintiff known the truth about Defendant’s misrepresentations, she would not have purchased the Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo product,” the Knorr Pasta Sides class action lawsuit states.

According to the Knorr Pasta Sides class action lawsuit, slack fill is air or filler material within a packaged product. Non-functional slack fill is slack fill that serves no legitimate purpose, and misleads consumers about the quantity of the food they are purchasing.

The Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo products are sold in non-transparent containers so customers think they are actually getting a full container of the product because they cannot see the actual contents of the container. Essentially, consumers are misled into believing that they are purchasing substantially more Knorr Pasta Sides product than they receive because the containers are comprised of empty space, or non-functional slack-fill.

Nowadays, consumers have come to expect significant slack fill in food products, but this does not excuse Unilever’s alleged deception in underfilling Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo products, Kasih contends. Faced with a large box and a smaller box, both with the same amount of product inside, consumers are naturally apt to choose the larger box because they think it’s a better value. Kasih asserts that Unilever knows this and purposely packages its Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo products in opaque containers that are almost half empty to capitalize on consumers purchasing nature.

Kasih brings this proposed consumer class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and all other California consumers who purchased Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo products with non-functional slack fill during the “applicable limitations period”. She is asking the court to award punitive and compensatory damages.

Kasih and the proposed classes are represented by Scott J. Ferrel of Pacific Trial Attorneys APC.

The Knorr Pasta Sides Alfredo Slack-Fill Class Action Lawsuit is Fasih. v. Unilever, Case No. 3:18-cv-010132-BEN-BLM, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

Herbal Zen Nutrition Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Too Much Slack Fill

The makers of Herbal Zen Nutrition Plant-based Protein products are facing a consumer class action lawsuit alleging the powders’ packaging contains too much non-functional slack fill.

Plaintiff Miao Xin Hu is asserting claims against Iovate Health Sciences USA for common law fraud, among other violations of state and federal consumer protection laws. On May 10, 2017, Hu purchased a 1.5 lbs container of Herbal Zen Nutrition protein powder product at a GNC store in New York for $19.97. But Hu claims, she did not receive the quantity of product that she paid for and was promised.

“As a result of Defendant’s deceptive conduct as alleged herein, Plaintiff Hu was injured when she paid full price for the Product but did not receive a full container. She would not have paid this sum had she known that the container was only a little more than half full,” the Herbal Zen Nutrition lawsuit states.

According to the Herbal Zen Nutrition class action lawsuit, slack fill is air or filler material within a packaged product. Non-functional slack fill is slack fill that serves no legitimate purpose, and misleads consumers about the quantity of the food they are purchasing.

The Herbal Zen Nutrition Product package is a plastic container that is approximately 7 inches in height with a 0.25 inch sealed portion at the top, and 6.75 inches of vertical capacity. However, the protein powder only fills the bottom four inches of the container, leaving 2.75 vertical inches of air – essentially 41 percent non-functional slack fill!

“When consumers purchase a package of Defendant’s Product, they are getting less protein powder then they bargained for. They are effectively tricked into paying for air, because the Product containers contain large amounts of non-functional slack fill.”

In fact, the 30-page complaint notes that Iovate’s own Purely Inspired Plant-based powder is the exact same size as its Herbal Zen Nutrition product container – yet the Purely Inspired container contains much more protein powder. This, Hu asserts, demonstrates that it is possible to fit a greater quantity of protein powder into Iovate’s Herbal Zen Nutrition containers. Hu says this proves that at least some of the empty space in the Herbal Zen containers is “unnecessary and thus misleading” to consumers.

Still, many consumers have come to expect significant slack fill in protein powder products, but this does not excuse Iovate’s alleged deception. The FDA has stated that “although consumers may become used to the presence of non-functional slack fill in a particular product or product line, the recurrence of slack fill over an extended period of time does not legitimize such slack fill if it is non-functional.”

Hu brings this proposed nationwide consumer class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and all other retail consumers who purchased Herbal Zen Nutrition Plant-based Protein Powder during the “applicable limitations period”. Hu is also seeking to certify a New York subclass.

Along with restitution and compensatory damages, the lawsuit is asking the court to require Iovate to immediately cease from continuing to misrepresent and conceal material information and engage in a corrective advertising campaign.

Hu and the proposed classes are represented by C.K. Lee and Anne Seelig of Lee Litigation Group, PLLC.

The Herbal Zen Nutrition Class Action Lawsuit is Hu, et al. v. Iovate Health Sciences USA, Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-09427, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.