CCRcorp Sites  

The CCRcorp Network unlocks access to a world of insights, research, guides and information in a range of specialty areas.

Our Sites

TheCorporateCounsel

TheCorporateCounsel.net

A basis for research and practical guidance focusing on federal securities laws, compliance & corporate governance.

DealLawyers

DealLawyers.com

An educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity – and much more.

CompensationStandards

CompensationStandards.com

The “one stop” resource for information about responsible executive compensation practices & disclosure.

Section16.net

Section16.net

Widely recognized as the premier online research platform providing practical guidance on issues involving Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all of its related rules.

PracticalESG

PracticalESG.com

Keeping you in-the-know on environmental, social and governance developments

A federal judge for the Northern District of California recently dismissed the high-profile greenwashing litigation against Apple. The case, which we’ve covered since its initial filing, alleged that Apple misled consumers by claiming that certain Apple watches were “carbon neutral.” The attempted class action argued Apple’s use of offsetting and poor-quality carbon credits made Apple’s sustainability claims misleading. However, the court sided with Apple, finding that the Plaintiffs failed to substantiate their claims:

“The Court first turns to Plaintiffs’ second theory of the case—that Apple failed to retire sufficient credits to account for the sale of Apple Watches marketed as carbon neutral. Every layer of Plaintiffs’ allegations about Apple’s sales of Apple Watches are based on unsubstantiated assumptions… The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to plausibly allege sufficient facts to survive a motion to dismiss. And unless Plaintiffs can amend their complaint to provide the requisite reasonable basis, the claims fail as a matter of law.”

For their part, Apple submitted compelling evidence that its use of carbon offsets was responsible. The company’s practices included the use of an offset “buffer pool” and compliance with the FTC’s green guides for environmental marketing. These practices, while compelling, were not weighed by the court because the plaintiff’s case was undermined by their deficient filings. The court has allowed Plaintiffs leave to amend, and we’ll see if they come back with sufficient evidence in the future.

Ultimately, Apple removed the “carbon neutral” labeling from its watches, owing to European legislation outlawing the practice. The outcome of this case shows that in the US, companies making net-zero claims can still use offsets, though they must take care to do so in a responsible manner.

Our members can learn more about greenwashing here.

If you’re not already a member, sign up now and take advantage of our no-risk “100-Day Promise” – during the first 100 days as an activated member, you may cancel for any reason and receive a full refund. But it will probably pay for itself before then. Members also save hours of research and reading time each week by using our filtered and curated library of ESG/sustainability resources covering over 100 sustainability subject areas – updated daily with practical and credible information.

Practical Guidance for Companies, Curated for Clarity.

Image credit: misu – stock.adobe.com

Back to all blogs

The Editor

Zachary Barlow is a licensed attorney. He earned his JD from the University of Mississippi and has a bachelor’s in Public Policy Leadership. He practiced law at a mid-size firm and handled a wide variety of cases. During this time he assisted in overseeing compliance of a public entity and litigated contract disputes, gaining experience both in and outside of the courtroom. Zachary currently assists the PracticalESG.com editorial team by providing research and creating content on a spectrum of ESG… View Profile