Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
—1—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 3 of 26 Page ID #:3
—2—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 4 of 26 Page ID #:4
1 Wattanaporn is Taste Nirvana Int’l’s President and agent for service of process. Taste
2 Nirvana Int’l was formed in 2015.
3 12. Defendant Surachai “Jack” Wattanaporn (“Wattanaporn”) is an individual
4 residing in California. Upon information and belief, Wattanaporn owns, operates, and
5 wholly controls PSW and Taste Nirvana Int’l (the “Company Defendants”).
6 13. In addition, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege,
7 that Defendant Wattanaporn is the “alter ego” of the Company Defendants and that
8 there exists, and at all times mentioned herein existed, a unity of interest and
9 ownership between Wattanaporn and the Company Defendants such that any
10 individuality and separateness between the Defendants has ceased to exist as
11 Wattanaporn controls the business and activities of the Company Defendants.
12 14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that at all
13 times mentioned herein, the Company Defendants were and are a mere shell,
14 instrumentality, and conduit through which Defendant Wattanaporn carried on his
15 business in a corporate name, exactly as he would have had there been no corporations
16 at all, exercising complete control and dominance over such businesses to the point
17 where any individuality or separateness between Wattanaporn and the Company
18 Defendants does not, and at all times herein mentioned, did not, exist.
19 15. Furthermore, upon information and belief, Defendant Wattanaporn
20 comingled and continues to comingle his assets with the Company Defendants’ assets,
21 controlled and continues to control the Company Defendants’ finances in their
22 entirety, treated and treats the Company Defendants’ assets as his own, and further
23 engaged and engages in such zealous controlling conduct towards the Company
24 Defendants that the Company Defendants were and are nothing more than mere
25 instrumentalities of Wattanaporn.
26 16. Adherence to the fiction of the separate existence of Wattanaporn as an
27 individual separate and distinct from the Company Defendants would permit an abuse
28 of the corporate privilege and would sanction fraud or promote injustice in that
—3—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 5 of 26 Page ID #:5
1 Wattanaporn might escape liability for the causes of action set out herein and produce
2 an inequitable result.
3 17. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that the
4 Company Defendants share any and all assets and liabilities as the companies share,
5 among other things, the same staff, shareholders, facilities, and headquarters in
6 Corona, California.
7 18. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that at all
8 relevant times, each Defendant was the principal, agent, partner, joint venturer, officer,
9 director, controlling shareholder, subsidiary, affiliate, parent corporation, successor in
10 interest, and/or predecessor in interest of some or all of the other Defendants, and was
11 engaged with some or all of the other Defendants in a joint enterprise for profit, and
12 bore such other relationships to some or all of the other Defendants so as to be liable
13 for their conduct with respect to the matters alleged herein.
14 19. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that each
15 Defendant acted pursuant to and within the scope of the relationships alleged above,
16 that each Defendant knew or should have known about, and authorized, ratified,
17 adopted, approved, controlled, and aided and abetted the conduct of all other
18 Defendants.
19 20. Plaintiffs are not aware of the true names and capacities of the defendants
20 identified herein as Does 1 through 10, and therefore fictitiously name said
21 defendants. Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to allege the true names and
22 capacities of these fictitiously named defendants when their identities and capacities
23 are ascertained.
24 21. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that PSW, Taste
25 Nirvana Int’l, Wattanaporn, and each of the fictitiously named Doe defendants
26 (collectively “Defendants”) were in some manner, and to some degree, responsible for
27 the acts alleged herein and the harm, losses, and damages suffered by Plaintiffs.
28
—4—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 6 of 26 Page ID #:6
1 22. As described further below, PSW, Taste Nirvana Int’l, and Wattanaporn
2 conduct business, produce, distribute, market, promote, and sell products in and from
3 California, throughout the United States, and internationally.
4 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
5 23. The most significant recent trend in the refreshment business has been
6 the move from sugary, carbonated soft drinks toward those perceived as healthier,
7 more natural choices. Coconut water—described by the UN Food and Agriculture
8 Organization as “the fluid of life”—has become the beverage of choice for health-
9 conscious consumers worldwide.1
10 24. Since at least 2007, Wattanaporn and PSW have sold coconut-water
11 products in the United States under the “Taste Nirvana” brand name. These products
12 include Pure Coconut Water (described as “All Natural” and containing only “Natural
13 Coconut Water”), Coconut Water with Pulp (described as “All Natural” and containing
14 only “Natural Coconut Water and Coconut Pulp”), and Coco Aloe (described as a
15 “super drink” containing only “Natural Coconut Water and Aloe Vera”), among others
16 (each a “Taste Nirvana Product”). Defendants at all times marketed, advertised,
17 promoted, and represented that the Taste Nirvana Products contained no added sugar,
18 water, or undisclosed additives.
19 25. In early 2012, Bloch was actively researching the coconut-water business
20 in Germany and evaluating potential manufacturers and producers for distribution
21 rights. Bloch called the US-based telephone number listed on Taste Nirvana’s website.
22 Eager to expand into the growing European market, Wattanaporn responded to
23 Bloch’s inquiry.
24 26. Bloch knew the German market well and confirmed that a premium price
25 could be charged for products containing all-natural coconut water with no added
26 1
See Coconut Water as Energy Drink for Joggers and Athletes, Food and Agriculture Organization
27 of the United Nations, Press Release 00/51, September 14, 2000, available at
http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/OIS/PRESS_NE/PRESSENG/2000/pren0051.htm
28
—5—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 7 of 26 Page ID #:7
—6—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 8 of 26 Page ID #:8
1 The 2012 advertisement represents that the Taste Nirvana Products contain no added
2 sugar, in addition to the following product-specific representations:
3
TASTE NIRVANA PURE COCONUT WATER
4 Simply coconut water – that’s it!
5
TASTE NIRVANA COCONUT WATER WITH PULP
6 Simply coconut water & delicious coconut bits – that’s it!
7
TASTE NIRVANA COCO ALOE
8 The only Aloe Vera beverage on the market
9 with no added sugar – just pure coconut water.
Simply coconut water & nutritious aloe vera – that’s it!
10
11 29. Based on Wattanaporn’s written and oral representations, in February
12 2013, Bloch purchased an initial order of Taste Nirvana Products for distribution in
13 Germany. In order to sell the Taste Nirvana Products in Germany, Bloch spent a
14 considerable amount of time and financial resources on label translations, legal
15 analysis of the translated labels, laboratory analysis to confirm the product was fit for
16 human consumption (e.g., containing no microorganisms or pesticides), recycling
17 registration, and customs registration. Bloch also established an online storefront,
18 secured warehouse space, and a logistics system—all at considerable expense borne
19 entirely by Bloch.
20 30. The Taste Nirvana Products sold well. Encouraged by the initial success
21 in Germany, Wattanaporn urged Bloch to expand her efforts and sell more Taste
22 Nirvana Products. Bloch obliged and focused all her time, energy, and money on
23 growing the new enterprise. Shortly thereafter, Bloch officially formed Farmkind
24 GmbH and continued to invest substantial amounts of her personal savings into the
25 company to hire employees, develop marketing materials and advertising, and to
26 secure warehousing and office space. These efforts were required by Wattanaporn to
27 demonstrate Farmkind’s ability to distribute the Taste Nirvana Products in Germany
28 and elsewhere in the EU.
—7—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 9 of 26 Page ID #:9
1 31. Bloch’s efforts paid off as Farmkind secured sales agreements with
2 numerous wholesalers and retailers in Germany including:
3 Edeka (largest supermarket chain in Germany with over 4,000 locations)
4 Tegut (supermarket with over 280 locations in Germany)
5 Budnikowsky (drugstore with over 180 locations in Germany)
6 Dennree (wholesaler to over 500 independent retailers in Germany)
7 dm (premium drugstore with over 2,000 locations in Germany)
8 Farmkind notified Defendants of all agreements and new customer relationships
9 (including each of the foregoing) to plan for shipment quantities and future
10 forecasting. As a result, Defendants were aware of Farmkind’s obligations to each
11 customer.
12 32. Through the efforts of Bloch and Farmkind, German sales of Taste
13 Nirvana Products grew from $0 in 2012 to over $1 million in 2017. Sales in 2018
14 were on pace to surpass $2 million.
15 33. In order to comply with German labeling regulations, Defendants
16 routinely provided Farmkind with product labels used in the United States. Farmkind
17 translated the English labels into German and submitted the translations to Defendants
18 for approval before introducing them into the German market. All German-language
19 labels on products sold by Farmkind were approved by Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
—8—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 10 of 26 Page ID #:10
1 34. For example, the label affixed to all Taste Nirvana Premium Coconut
2 Water with Pulp distributed by Farmkind included a German translation of the
3 following label supplied by Defendants to Farmkind:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 The label includes the following statements:
17 Simply Coconut Water & Pulp INGREDIENTS: COCONUT
18 That’s it! WATER, COCONUT PULP.
19
20 35. Similarly, to comply with German regulations and the requests of
21 retailers and consumers, Wattanaporn routinely provided Farmkind with product
22 quality reports, manufacturing certifications, and other assurances regarding Taste
23 Nirvana Products.
24 36. For example, on or about August 2, 2017, Wattanaporn provided
25 Farmkind with a letter certifying that Taste Nirvana Real Coconut Water with Pulp
26 contained only coconut water and coconut pulp with no added water and no added
27 sugar. Wattanaporn encouraged Farmkind to provide this certification letter to
28 Farmkind’s customers and the regulatory agencies in Germany.
—9—
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 11 of 26 Page ID #:11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
37. Wattanaporn provided similar letters to Farmkind certifying the
20
following:
21 Taste Nirvana Real Coconut Water
22 Contains Only Coconut Water
No Added Sugar
23
No added water
24
Taste Nirvana Real Coco Aloe
25
Contains Only Coconut Water, Aloe Vera, and Coconut Pulp
26 No Added Sugar
No Added Water
27
28
— 10 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 12 of 26 Page ID #:12
— 11 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 13 of 26 Page ID #:13
— 12 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 14 of 26 Page ID #:14
1 and coconuts have Oxygen SIRA results between -2 and 2. Groundwater or water
2 typically found in a municipal or industrial water supply has Oxygen SIRA results of
3 -10 to -5. The tests of Taste Nirvana Products showed Oxygen SIRA results ranging
4 from -5.3 to -3.2.
5 45. According to a food-testing scientist, these lab results “are not consistent
6 with pure coconut water” and indicate “significant amounts of sugar are added from
7 sugar cane or corn syrup” in addition to “significant amounts of water from industrial
8 or municipal sources.” The added water is used either to dilute pure coconut water or
9 reconstitute the coconut water from concentrate. In short, Taste Nirvana Products are
10 not 100% coconut water—not even close.
11 46. Farmkind reported these findings to Defendants including Wattanaporn.
12 Initially, Wattanaporn denied everything and said labs could not test for added water
13 or added sugar. Wattanaporn refused to fully reimburse Farmkind for the testing costs
14 or Farmkind’s growing legal fees incurred as a result of its mandated cooperation with
15 the German regulatory and enforcement authorities.
16 47. Facing fines from German regulatory agencies, lawsuits, and mounting
17 legal expenses, Farmkind had no choice but to initiate a massive recall of all Taste
18 Nirvana Products and notify their customers that Farmkind would be unable to fulfil
19 existing or future orders of Taste Nirvana Products. The costs of the recall were
20 substantial as Farmkind was forced to reimburse its customers, pay freight and
21 shipping costs, and expand warehouse space to store the recalled products.
22 48. Germany’s Office of Consumer Protection conducted its own lab tests
23 which confirmed Farmkind’s test results. The German authorities have ordered
24 Farmkind not to sell any Taste Nirvana Product and warehouse all remaining stocks
25 pending further investigation.
26 49. In addition to the recall, Farmkind was forced to breach its agreements
27 with multiple customers including Edeka, Tegut, Budnikowsky, Dennree, and dm.
28
— 13 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 15 of 26 Page ID #:15
1 50. Wattanaporn met with Farmkind and admitted that his production process
2 was far less “natural” than Defendants represented. Wattanaporn admitted that
3 significant amounts of water, sugar, and additives including coconut extract are added
4 to all Taste Nirvana Products. Wattanaporn further admitted that this process decreases
5 production costs and enhances the final product’s flavor and fragrance.
6 51. Farmkind was shocked by the deception. Despite attempts to negotiate a
7 fair resolution and compensate Plaintiffs for their damages, Wattanaporn was unfazed
8 and seemingly unconcerned with Farmkind’s plight, legal liabilities, and imminent
9 bankruptcy. Wattanaporn refused to take any immediate remedial steps, reimburse
10 Farmkind, order a global recall, or change the production process.
11 52. Instead, Defendants instructed Farmkind to repeat the following
12 “official” statement:
13 Taste Nirvana proudly stand behinds the quality of our products. We are
currently experiencing raw ingredient supply shortage issues and are working
14 very hard to get stock of our Taste Nirvana Real Coconut Water back on
shelves, so our loyal consumers can continue to enjoy the highest standard
15 from Taste Nirvana products. We will let you know as soon as we can when
16 this will occur and thank you for your loyalty and support.
17 Farmkind knew the “official” statement was not true and refused to repeat it.
18 53. As a result, Farmkind’s entire business has collapsed and, in addition to
19 the costs and damages described above, Farmkind remains liable to consumers,
20 competitors, and regulatory agencies for Defendants’ false labeling, fraud,
21 misrepresentations, and other tortious conduct.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
— 14 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 16 of 26 Page ID #:16
— 15 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 17 of 26 Page ID #:17
1 57. Defendants, directly or through their agents and employees, made false
2 representations, concealments, and nondisclousres to Plaintiffs.
3 58. In making the representations of fact to Plaintiffs described herein,
4 Defendants have failed to fulfill their duties to disclose the material facts set forth
5 above.
6 59. Defendants, in making the representations and omissions, and in doing
7 the acts alleged above, knew that the representations were not true or made the
8 representations recklessly without regard for their truth. Specifically, Defendants
9 knew that the Taste Nirvana Products contained added water, contained added sugar,
10 and contained additional undisclosed additives.
11 60. Defendants’ false representations were intentional as Defendants made
12 and intended the misrepresentations to induce Plaintiffs’ reliance.
13 61. Plaintiffs did rely on these false representations and nondisclousres by
14 Defendants when purchasing the Taste Nirvana Products, investing in and expanding
15 the distribution business, and continuing to sell Taste Nirvana Products which reliance
16 was justified and reasonably foreseeable.
17 62. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs suffered and
18 continue to suffer economic losses and other general and specific damages, including
19 but not limited to the amounts paid for the Taste Nirvana Products and amounts
20 invested into expanding the distribution business, all in an amount to be determined at
21 trial but not less than $5,000,000.
22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
23 (Negligent Misrepresentation)
24 63. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations in
25 all preceding paragraphs and further allege as follows:
26 64. Defendants, directly or through their agents and employees, made false
27 representations, concealments, and nondisclousres to Plaintiffs.
28
— 16 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 18 of 26 Page ID #:18
— 17 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 19 of 26 Page ID #:19
1 were not true. Specifically, Defendants knew or reasonably should have known that
2 the Taste Nirvana Products contained added water, contained added sugar, and
3 contained additional undisclosed additives.
4 73. Plaintiffs relied on these false representations and nondisclousres by
5 Defendants when purchasing the Taste Nirvana Products, investing in and expanding
6 the distribution business, and continuing to sell Taste Nirvana Products which reliance
7 was justified and reasonably foreseeable.
8 74. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs suffered and
9 continue to suffer economic losses in an amount to be determined at trial but not less
10 than $5,000,000.
11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
12 (Unjust Enrichment)
13 75. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations in
14 all preceding paragraphs and further allege as follows:
15 76. As a result of Defendants’ deceptive, fraudulent, and misleading labeling,
16 advertising, marketing, and sales of Taste Nirvana Products, Defendants were enriched
17 at the expense of Plaintiffs through the payment of premium purchase prices,
18 Plaintiffs’ investment in and expanding the German market, and securing lucrative
19 sales agreements with German customers, including major supermarkets and
20 drugstores.
21 77. Under these circumstances, it would be inequitable to permit Defendants
22 to retain the ill-gotten benefits they received from Plaintiffs or through Plaintiffs’
23 efforts in light of the fact that Defendants falsely labeled the Taste Nirvana Products
24 and repeated this falsity orally and in writing over the course of several years. It would
25 be unjust for Defendants to retain any benefit without restitution to Plaintiffs.
26
27
28
— 18 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 20 of 26 Page ID #:20
— 19 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 21 of 26 Page ID #:21
— 20 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 22 of 26 Page ID #:22
— 21 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 23 of 26 Page ID #:23
— 22 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 24 of 26 Page ID #:24
1 105. Plaintiffs had a reasonable likelihood of future economic benefit from the
2 continued sales of Taste Nirvana Products to existing and prospective customers in
3 Germany.
4 106. Defendants intentionally and improperly interfered with Plaintiffs’
5 business expectancy by failing to provide accurate labeling information and refusing
6 to correct inaccurate labeling information.
7 107. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ interreference, Plaintiffs
8 lost existing customers and were severely prejudiced from acquiring new customers.
9 108. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs suffered and
10 continue to suffer economic losses in an amount to be determined at trial but not less
11 than $5,000,000.
12 PRAYER
13 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, providing
14 such relief as follows:
15 A. An order requiring an accounting for, and imposition of a
16 constructive trust upon, all monies received by Defendants as a
17 result of the unfair, misleading, fraudulent, and unlawful conduct
18 alleged herein;
19 B. Restitution, disgorgement, refund, and/or other monetary damages,
20 together with costs, disbursements, including reasonable attorneys’
21 fees pursuant to the applicable statutes and pre-judgment interest at
22 the maximum rate allowable by law;
23 C. Damages, together with costs and disbursements, including
24 reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to the applicable statutes;
25 D. Monetary damages, including but not limited to any compensatory,
26 incidental, or consequential damages in an amount to be
27 determined at trial, together with pre-judgment interest at the
28 maximum rate allowable by law with respect to the claims alleged;
— 23 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 25 of 26 Page ID #:25
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
— 24 —
COMPLAINT
Case 2:18-cv-08463 Document 1 Filed 10/01/18 Page 26 of 26 Page ID #:26
1
2 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
3 Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury.
4
5
6 October 1, 2018 WILSON KEADJIAN BROWNDORF LLP
7
8
9 By: __ _________________________
BENJAMIN M. CUTCHSHAW
10 bcutchshaw@wkbllp.com
11 1900 Main Street, Suite 600
Irvine, California 92614
12
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13 PATRICIA BLOCH and
FARMKIND GmbH
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
— 25 —
COMPLAINT