Crunch Berries Not a Fruit, Judge Rules

This just in from the Department of Duh: Cap’N Crunch Crunch Berries are not a fruit.  Last month, a judge in California dismissed a claim brought by a woman who believed PepsiCo, the parent company of Cap’N Crunch manufacturer Quaker Oaks, had misled “reasonable consumers” with its colorful Crunch Berries.  “Plaintiff contends that the colorful Crunchberries, combined with use of the word ‘berry’ in the Product name, convey the message that Cap’n Crunch is not all sugar and starch, but contains redeeming fruit,” the opinion says.  Find out what Judge Morrison C. England Jr. thought after the jump. “This Court is not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual fruit referred to as a ‘crunchberry,’” England writes in the May 21 opinion brought to our attention by the blog Lowering the Bar. “Furthermore, the ‘Crunchberries’ depicted on the PDP [principal display panel] are round, crunchy, brightly-colored cereal balls, and the PDP clearly states both that the Product contains ‘sweetened corn & oat cereal’ and that the cereal is ‘enlarged to show texture.’  “Thus, a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that the Product in the instant case contained a fruit that does not exist,” he said.

Source >> Lowering the Bar