Court Applies FTC Green Guides in Igloo Marketing Lawsuit
A proposed class action challenging recycled content, biodegradability, and “Made in USA” claims on Igloo-brand cooler products can proceed, the Eastern District of New York ruled on February 2, 2026.
According to the court, Igloo makes unqualified recycled content and biodegradability claims on the front labels of various products. These include statements such as “Made From Biodegradable Materials” and “Made With Post Consumer Recycled Plastic Material,” often accompanied by the chasing arrows recycling symbol. Igloo also advertises certain products with unqualified “Made in USA” representations. The plaintiffs, a New York consumer and a Texas consumer, allege that these claims are deceptive and that they would not have purchased the products at the stated price had they known the products lacked these qualities.
The court’s analysis centered on the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) Green Guides, which provide guidance on environmental marketing claims. Although the guidance does not create independent causes of action, the court emphasized that alleged noncompliance can support deception claims because the Green Guides “illustrate how unqualified representations of a product’s qualities may plausibly deceive and mislead a reasonable consumer.”
With respect to Igloo’s unqualified biodegradability claims, the court observed that the Green Guides caution against such claims for products disposed of in landfills, where conditions do not allow for prompt degradation. Combined with studies cited by the plaintiffs, this guidance made the plaintiffs’ deception theory plausible at the pleading stage.
Similarly, the court found the company’s recycling content claims plausibly deceptive because they did not disclose that the products were not entirely made of recycled content—despite the Green Guides’ instruction that marketers qualify claims for products containing both recycled and non-recycled content.
The court also held that, at this stage, the plaintiffs had standing to challenge representations made about products they did not purchase. It noted, however, that Igloo may renew its standing arguments at class certification.
“Made in USA” and Other Claims
The plaintiffs’ “Made in USA” claims also survived dismissal, despite falling outside the scope of the Green Guides. The court held that the allegations—that only a “minimal amount” of certain materials used by Igloo are produced domestically—were enough at the pleading stage, even without concrete proof that the contested products contain foreign materials.
“Plaintiffs have alleged that the relevant products contain ‘materials’ and ‘full components’ sourced and imported from other countries,” the court wrote. “This is sufficient to allege that the Made in USA Representations were materially misleading”
Two claims did not survive. The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty claim for failure to provide pre-suit notice, and dismissed the unjust enrichment claim as duplicative of the statutory and common law claims.
Throughout the opinion, the court repeatedly declined to rule or provide commentary on the merits. Quoting caselaw, the court emphasized that “‘[a] federal trial judge, with a background and experience unlike that of most consumers, is hardly in a position to declare’ that reasonable consumers would not be misled.”
The case is Lieber v. Igloo Products Corp., No. 25-cv-488 (E.D.N.Y.), filed January 28, 2025.
