<p>，/PRNewswire/ -- 两名加利福尼亚消费者已对好市多（Costco Wholesale Corporation）提起全国性集体诉讼，指控这家零售巨头通过虚假宣传其受欢迎的 Kirkland Signature 调味旋转烤鸡含有 “无防腐剂”，而实际上该产品添加了延长保质期和保持质地的防腐剂，误导了数百万购物者。</p>
<p>该诉讼在加利福尼亚南区美国地方法院提起，控诉称好市多通过在店内和在线上显著宣传旋转烤鸡为无防腐剂，系统性地欺骗了消费者，导致其损失数千万甚至数亿美元，同时添加了作为防腐剂的磷酸钠和卡拉胶。</p>
<p><strong>显著的 “无防腐剂” 声明被指误导消费者</strong></p>
<p>根据诉讼，好市多在店内展示大型标牌和在线产品列表，声明 “无防腐剂”，没有任何限制。原告加利福尼亚大熊湖的 Bianca Johnston 和加利福尼亚埃斯孔迪多的 Anatasia Chernov 表示，他们在购买该产品时依赖于这些表述，认为鸡肉不含任何保持味道、质地或保质期的添加剂。</p>
<p>诉状称好市多的表述是虚假和误导性的，因为添加到旋转烤鸡中的磷酸钠和卡拉胶具有防腐功能，通过抑制变质、稳定蛋白质和延长货架稳定性。</p>
<p>加利福尼亚阿尔梅达律师事务所的管理合伙人 <strong>Wesley M. Griffith</strong> 表示：“消费者在决定自己和家人将吃什么时，合理地依赖于清晰、显著的声明，如 ‘无防腐剂’。好市多自己的成分列表与其营销相矛盾。这是违法的，也是 unfair 的。”</p>
<p><strong>消费者日益寻求食品成分的透明度</strong></p>
<p>诉讼引用行业研究显示，消费者对与防腐剂相关的声明非常重视，并越来越寻求不含添加剂的 “干净标签” 产品。原告声称好市多利用了这一趋势，同时隐瞒了其产品的真实性质。</p>
<p><strong>根据华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州消费者保护法的指控</strong></p>
<p>诉状提出的指控包括：</p>
<ul>
<li>华盛顿州消费者保护法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚消费者法律救济法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚不公平竞争法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚虚假广告法</li>
</ul>
<p>原告寻求禁令救济、赔偿、损害赔偿和通过好市多的误导性营销获得的利润返还。</p>
<p><strong>原告表示如果知道真相就不会购买该产品</strong></p>
<p>两名原告均表示，如果好市多披露该产品含有添加的防腐剂，他们就不会购买旋转烤鸡——或者会支付更少的价格。他们还表示，如果该产品确实不含防腐剂，他们打算在未来再次购买，但在好市多的表述不真实的情况下无法依赖其宣传。</p>
<p><strong>案件信息</strong></p>
<p>案件为 <em>Johnston vs. Costco Wholesale Corporation,</em> 加利福尼亚南区美国地方法院。案件编号尚未分配。</p>
<p>来源 阿尔梅达律师事务所（Almeida Law Group, LLC）</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif/query-RGF0ZUlkPTIwMjYwMTIyJk5ld3NJdGVtSWQ9Q0w2OTUzNSZUcmFuc21pc3Npb25fSWQ9MjAyNjAxMjIxOTA4UFJfTkVXU19VU1BSX19fX19DTDY5NTM1?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif/query-RGF0ZUlkPTIwMjYwMTIyJk5ld3NJdGVtSWQ9Q0w2OTUzNSZUcmFuc21pc3Npb25fSWQ9MjAyNjAxMjIxOTA4UFJfTkVXU19VU1BSX19fX19DTDY5NTM1"/></p>

开市客

<p>两名加利福尼亚消费者已对好市多提起集体诉讼，声称该公司虚假宣传其 Kirkland Signature 旋转烤鸡为 “无防腐剂”。诉讼称，这种鸡肉含有磷酸钠和卡拉胶，这些成分作为防腐剂，与好市多的营销声明相矛盾。原告辩称，他们在购买该产品时依赖于这些陈述，并根据各种消费者保护法寻求赔偿和补偿。他们声称，如果知道鸡肉含有防腐剂，他们就不会购买</p>

<p>, /PRNewswire/ -- Two California consumers have filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against Costco Wholesale Corporation, alleging the retail giant has misled millions of shoppers by falsely advertising its popular Kirkland Signature Seasoned Rotisserie Chicken as containing &#34;no preservatives,&#34; despite formulating the product with added preservatives that extend shelf life and maintain texture.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>，/PRNewswire/ -- 两名加利福尼亚消费者已对好市多（Costco Wholesale Corporation）提起全国性集体诉讼，指控这家零售巨头通过虚假宣传其受欢迎的 Kirkland Signature 调味旋转烤鸡含有 “无防腐剂”，而实际上该产品添加了延长保质期和保持质地的防腐剂，误导了数百万购物者。</p>
</div><p>Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, the complaint asserts that Costco has &#34;systemically cheated customers out of tens—if not hundreds—of millions of dollars&#34; by prominently marketing the Rotisserie Chicken as preservative–free in stores and online while adding sodium phosphate and carrageenan—ingredients that function as preservatives.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>该诉讼在加利福尼亚南区美国地方法院提起，控诉称好市多通过在店内和在线上显著宣传旋转烤鸡为无防腐剂，系统性地欺骗了消费者，导致其损失数千万甚至数亿美元，同时添加了作为防腐剂的磷酸钠和卡拉胶。</p>
</div><p><strong>Prominent &#34;No Preservatives&#34; Claims Allegedly Misled Shoppers</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>显著的 “无防腐剂” 声明被指误导消费者</strong></p>
</div><p>According to the lawsuit, Costco displays large in–store signage and online product listings stating &#34;No Preservatives,&#34; without qualification. Plaintiffs Bianca Johnston of Big Bear, California and Anatasia Chernov of Escondido, California say they relied on these representations when purchasing the product, believing the chicken contained no additives that preserve taste, texture, or shelf life.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>根据诉讼，好市多在店内展示大型标牌和在线产品列表，声明 “无防腐剂”，没有任何限制。原告加利福尼亚大熊湖的 Bianca Johnston 和加利福尼亚埃斯孔迪多的 Anatasia Chernov 表示，他们在购买该产品时依赖于这些表述，认为鸡肉不含任何保持味道、质地或保质期的添加剂。</p>
</div><p>The complaint alleges that Costco's representations were false and misleading because sodium phosphate and carrageenan—both added to the Rotisserie Chicken—perform preservative functions by inhibiting spoilage, stabilizing proteins, and extending shelf stability.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>诉状称好市多的表述是虚假和误导性的，因为添加到旋转烤鸡中的磷酸钠和卡拉胶具有防腐功能，通过抑制变质、稳定蛋白质和延长货架稳定性。</p>
</div><p>&#34;Consumers reasonably rely on clear, prominent claims like 'No Preservatives,' especially when deciding what they and their families will eat,&#34; said California Managing Partner <strong>Wesley M. Griffith</strong> of the Almeida Law Group. &#34;Costco's own ingredient list contradicts its marketing. That's unlawful, and it's unfair.&#34;</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>加利福尼亚阿尔梅达律师事务所的管理合伙人 <strong>Wesley M. Griffith</strong> 表示：“消费者在决定自己和家人将吃什么时，合理地依赖于清晰、显著的声明，如 ‘无防腐剂’。好市多自己的成分列表与其营销相矛盾。这是违法的，也是 unfair 的。”</p>
</div><p><strong>Consumers Increasingly Seek Transparency in Food Ingredients</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>消费者日益寻求食品成分的透明度</strong></p>
</div><p>The lawsuit cites industry research showing that consumers place significant weight on preservative–related claims and increasingly seek &#34;clean label&#34; products free from additives. Plaintiffs allege that Costco capitalized on this trend while concealing the true nature of its product.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>诉讼引用行业研究显示，消费者对与防腐剂相关的声明非常重视，并越来越寻求不含添加剂的 “干净标签” 产品。原告声称好市多利用了这一趋势，同时隐瞒了其产品的真实性质。</p>
</div><p><strong>Claims Under Washington and California Consumer Protection Laws</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>根据华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州消费者保护法的指控</strong></p>
</div><p>The complaint brings claims under:</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>诉状提出的指控包括：</p>
</div><ul>
<li>Washington Consumer Protection Act</li>
<li>California Consumers Legal Remedies Act</li>
<li>California Unfair Competition Law</li>
<li>California False Advertising Law</li>
</ul>
<div class="lb-trans"><ul>
<li>华盛顿州消费者保护法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚消费者法律救济法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚不公平竞争法</li>
<li>加利福尼亚虚假广告法</li>
</ul>
</div><p>Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, restitution, damages, and disgorgement of profits obtained through Costco's misleading marketing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>原告寻求禁令救济、赔偿、损害赔偿和通过好市多的误导性营销获得的利润返还。</p>
</div><p><strong>Plaintiffs Say They Would Not Have Purchased the Product Had They Known the Truth</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>原告表示如果知道真相就不会购买该产品</strong></p>
</div><p>Both plaintiffs allege they would not have purchased the Rotisserie Chicken—or would have paid less—had Costco disclosed that the product contains added preservatives. They also state they intend to purchase the product again in the future if it is actually preservative free but cannot rely on Costco's representations unless they are truthful.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>两名原告均表示，如果好市多披露该产品含有添加的防腐剂，他们就不会购买旋转烤鸡——或者会支付更少的价格。他们还表示，如果该产品确实不含防腐剂，他们打算在未来再次购买，但在好市多的表述不真实的情况下无法依赖其宣传。</p>
</div><p><strong>Case Information</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>案件信息</strong></p>
</div><p>The case is <em>Johnston vs. Costco Wholesale Corporation,</em> United States District Court for the Southern District of California. A case number has not yet been assigned.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>案件为 <em>Johnston vs. Costco Wholesale Corporation,</em> 加利福尼亚南区美国地方法院。案件编号尚未分配。</p>
</div><p>SOURCE Almeida Law Group, LLC</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>来源 阿尔梅达律师事务所（Almeida Law Group, LLC）</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif/query-RGF0ZUlkPTIwMjYwMTIyJk5ld3NJdGVtSWQ9Q0w2OTUzNSZUcmFuc21pc3Npb25fSWQ9MjAyNjAxMjIxOTA4UFJfTkVXU19VU1BSX19fX19DTDY5NTM1" alt="" original-src="https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif?NewsItemId=CL69535&amp;Transmission_Id=202601221908PR_NEWS_USPR_____CL69535&amp;DateId=20260122"/></p>

19:08 ET
			
			
				Consumers Represented by the Almeida Law Group File Class Action Alleging Costco Deceived Shoppers with False "No Preservatives" Claims on Kirkland Rotisserie Chicken

由 Almeida 法律集团代表的消费者提起集体诉讼，指控开市客在 Kirkland 烤鸡上以虚假的 “无防腐剂” 声明误导消费者