A federal judge has refused to certify a class of Snapple purchasers who asserted that Snapple’s claims of “All Natural” ingredients in its teas and juices violated New York consumer protection laws because the beverages contained high-fructose corn syrup. It’s the latest defeat for plaintiffs in cases alleging that food and beverage companies have deceived the public about their products’ health consequences. A lawyer for Snapple said the decision should have “persuasive effect” in similar suits in other jurisdictions.

U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel’s July 22 judgment in San Francisco Technology Inc.

A Federal Circuit decision dramatically increasing potential fines in “false marking” cases has unleashed a wave of whistleblower suits accusing companies of falsely labeling their products as covered by patents. Since the ruling, plaintiffs lawyers have filed more than 130 suits, and defense lawyers are bracing for more. But the lawsuit pileup could be short-lived, as pending Federal Circuit appeals would curb such suits, and proposed legislation would allow only competitors harmed by a rival’s false marking to file such suits.

Lawyers for electronic cigarette distributors told a federal judge on Monday that their clients do not market their products as a way to quit smoking, and that the Food and Drug Administration was acting like “a dog chasing its own tail” as it tried to explain why it was barring shipments of the devices into the United States. The judge asked the lawyers to explain how the recently passed Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which brought cigarettes within FDA’s regulatory reach, might affect the case.