ARTICLE
21 April 2026

Ninth Circuit Clarifies The Role Of Ambiguity In Applying The Reasonable Consumer Standard In Class Actions

SM
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

Contributor

Businesses turn to Sheppard to deliver sophisticated counsel to help clients move ahead. With more than 1,200 lawyers located in 16 offices worldwide, our client-centered approach is grounded in nearly a century of building enduring relationships on trust and collaboration. Our broad and diversified practices serve global clients—from startups to Fortune 500 companies—at every stage of the business cycle, including high-stakes litigation, complex transactions, sophisticated financings and regulatory issues. With leading edge technologies and innovation behind our team, we pride ourselves on being a strategic partner to our clients.
In Panelli v. Target Corp., No. 24-6640, (9th Cir. Apr. 17, 2026), the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s dismissal of a putative class action alleging that the sale of 100% cotton bedsheets...
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP are most popular:
  • within Cannabis & Hemp topic(s)

In Panelli v. Target Corp., No. 24-6640, (9th Cir. Apr. 17, 2026), the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s dismissal of a putative class action alleging that the sale of 100% cotton bedsheets with claimed thread counts of 600 or greater violated California’s consumer protection statutes. The plaintiff alleged that testing showed that the advertised 800-count bedsheets he purchased had a thread count of 288 and that it is physically impossible to achieve greater than 600 thread counts with cotton. The district court dismissed the complaint, finding plaintiff’s allegation of physical impossibility dispositive because no reasonable consumer would interpret the advertising as promising something impossible.

The Ninth Circuit reasoned that the district court misapplied Moore v. Trader Joe’s Co., 4 F.4th 874 (9th Cir. 2021), because the district court should not have considered the context of physical impossibility without first analyzing whether the advertising was ambiguous. Unlike the ambiguous claim at issue in Moore, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the thread count “purports to communicate an objective measurement of a physical aspect of the product” and was not ambiguous.

The Ninth Circuit concluded that the plaintiff adequately alleged a literally false and actionable claim, noting that while some claims may be so clearly false that no reasonable consumer would be deceived, the thread count claim was not so unreasonable or fanciful as to trigger that exception.

The Panelli decision reinforces that “ambiguity” of a challenged advertising statement continues to play a key role in determining the viability of consumer false advertising claims in the Ninth Circuit. A plaintiff who can plausibly allege literal falsity, rather than mere ambiguity or misleadingness, will be in the strongest position to survive a motion to dismiss. Defendants who move to dismiss by relying on context should therefore be certain to include the analytical step of ambiguity in their motion.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More