Watkins v. Vital Pharmaceuticals, No. 13-55755 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed a class action suit against Vital for its distribution of ZERO IMPACT protein bars that were erroneously marketed and labeled as having little to no impact on blood sugar. On appeal, Vital challenged the district court's sua sponte order remanding the suit to state court for failure to establish the amount in controversy requirement under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. 1453(c)(1). The court reversed and remanded, concluding that the undisputed Cimino declarations were sufficient to establish that CAFA's $5 million amount in controversy requirement was met.
Court Description: Class Action Fairness Act. Determining that it had jurisdiction to consider the district court’s sua sponte order remanding this case to state court, the panel reversed the district court’s order and remanded to the district court with instructions to exercise jurisdiction over this case because the undisputed declaration submitted by defendant sufficiently established that the amount in controversy was at least $5 million, as required by the Class Action Fairness Act. Concurring in part and dissenting in part, Judge Fisher stated that because it was not clear that the district court considered the declaration submitted by the defendant, and because it was not clear that the declaration was sufficient as a matter of law to establish the amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence, he would vacate the district court’s order and remand to the district court to determine in the first instance, in light of the declaration, whether defendant met its burden of proving that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.