Two California consumers have filed a proposed class action against Cento Fine Foods, and the Cento San Marzano lawsuit accuses the company of misleading shoppers by labeling its canned tomatoes “Certified San Marzano” without authorization from the Italian consortium that governs the authentic designation. Filed in May 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as Andrich et al. v. Cento Fine Foods Inc. (Case No. 3:26-cv-04012), the suit seeks more than $25 million in damages on behalf of consumers nationwide.
What the Plaintiffs Say Is Deceptive
Mike Andrich and Natalie Gianne claim that the word “Certified” on Cento’s cans creates the false impression of an official Protected Designation of Origin, or DOP, from Italy. Only one body, Il Consorzio di Tutela del Pomodoro San Marzano DOP, is authorized by the European Union to grant that designation, and the complaint alleges Cento’s tomatoes neither carry it nor meet the production standards behind it.1CBS News. San Marzano Tomatoes Cento Products Lawsuit
Cento markets products such as “Cento San Marzano Certified Peeled Tomatoes” and uses phrases like “America’s Favorite San Marzano Tomato” and “UNMATCHED CERTIFICATION.” The labels say the tomatoes are “certified by an independent third-party agency,” which Cento identifies as Agri-Cert.2Fox Business. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint The plaintiffs argue that framing is misleading because Agri-Cert certifies food traceability under a voluntary safety standard (ISO 22005), not compliance with DOP agricultural and quality rules. The complaint quotes the ISO 22005 standard itself, which states that where a product has qualitative characteristics like a DOP, the certification must make clear those characteristics are not covered.3ClassAction.org. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint Nothing on the can, the plaintiffs say, tells you the difference; a consumer has to visit Cento’s website to learn who actually did the certifying.4Post-Crescent. Lawsuit Claims Cento Tomatoes Are Not Real San Marzanos
The complaint also folds in older allegations that were not part of earlier litigation: a 2010 Italian police raid on Cento’s Italian operations that seized 144,000 cans falsely labeled DOP; the May 15, 2019 criminal fraud convictions of Cento’s Italian manager Giuseppe Napoletano and his father Eugenio Napoletano at the Court of Nocera Inferiore, each receiving 26-month suspended sentences and fines; and a December 2022 RAI 3 investigation that identified Cento as the “biggest offender” among U.S. brands selling non-DOP tomatoes under the San Marzano name.2Fox Business. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint4Post-Crescent. Lawsuit Claims Cento Tomatoes Are Not Real San Marzanos5Gustiamo. San Marzano Tomatoes: RAI 3 Reports Fraud in the US
Cento’s own account of its split from the consortium differs. The company has said it voluntarily stopped seeking consortium certification in the 2010s over labeling disagreements.6ABC News. Popular Italian Food Brand Accused of Tomato Fraud The complaint alleges Cento was ejected from the consortium in 2011 following the fraud investigation.3ClassAction.org. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint
Why “Certified San Marzano” Is Contested Ground
Authentic San Marzano DOP tomatoes are governed by EU regulations first set in 1996. They must be grown in the Agro Sarnese-Nocerino volcanic plain near Mount Vesuvius, come from specific seed varieties, be hand-harvested, and be sold only as whole peeled tomatoes or half-cut fillets. Genuine DOP cans carry the full registered name, the EU’s red-and-yellow DOP logo, the consortium’s seal, and a unique traceability code. Certification is performed by Agroqualità S.p.A., a body authorized under EU rules, and only products on its registry are recognized as DOP.7Consorzio di Tutela del Pomodoro San Marzano DOP. Official Site
In the United States, though, the name “San Marzano” has no standalone legal protection. No FDA rule restricts it to products from the DOP region, so brands can use it on labels without automatic consequences. The consortium’s main U.S. enforcement tool is the Lanham Act, which requires case-by-case litigation.8Courthouse News Service. Canned Tomato Packaging Misleads Consumers, Federal Judge Rules Consortium president Edoardo Ruggiero has estimated that as few as 5% of tomatoes sold as “San Marzano” in American grocery stores are genuine DOP products.3ClassAction.org. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint
Who Is Covered and What the Suit Seeks
The proposed class covers all U.S. residents who bought Cento San Marzano tomatoes for personal or household use between January 1, 2016 and the present. The plaintiffs ask for disgorgement and restitution of Cento’s revenue from those sales, plus an injunction requiring the company to stop using the “Certified San Marzano” label and to run a corrective advertising campaign.3ClassAction.org. Andrich v. Cento Fine Foods Complaint
Cento’s Response and the New York Case That Was Thrown Out
Cento has called the allegations meritless. A lawyer for the company told reporters it would defend “vigorously” and seek prompt dismissal, pointing to a nearly identical suit that failed six years ago.6ABC News. Popular Italian Food Brand Accused of Tomato Fraud
That earlier case, Sibrian v. Cento Fine Foods, Inc., was filed in the Eastern District of New York in 2019 and dismissed on July 2, 2020. The court held that a reasonable consumer would not read “Certified San Marzano” as implying certification by the Italian consortium in particular. The labels did not display the consortium’s seal or serial numbers, and Cento’s claim of being “certified” was technically true because Agri-Cert had certified the product. A true statement, the judge wrote, cannot support a fraud claim just because a consumer reads more into it. New York state law claims were dismissed with prejudice; claims under other states’ laws were dismissed without prejudice, leaving room for suits like the current one.9GovInfo. Sibrian v. Cento Fine Foods Inc.
Why California Could Go a Different Way
The new complaint is brought under the California Unfair Competition Law and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, which apply their own standards for deceptive marketing.10ClassAction.org. Cento San Marzano Lawsuit Filed Over Alleged Tomato Fraud California courts have already shown some appetite for these arguments. In February 2024, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of the Northern District of California denied a motion to dismiss in Andrea Valiente v. Simpson Imports, Ltd., a case involving a different brand’s tomato packaging. The judge expressly distinguished Sibrian, finding that affirmative label features designed to evoke San Marzano authenticity could plausibly mislead a reasonable consumer.11New York Times. San Marzano Tomato Lawsuit
Where the Case Stands
Cento filed its motion to dismiss on June 18, 2026. The plaintiffs’ response was due July 2, 2026, and Cento’s reply July 9, with a hearing scheduled for July 30, 2026 in San Francisco.12PACER Monitor. Andrich et al v. Cento Fine Foods Inc. No ruling has issued, and no settlement talks have been reported. If you bought Cento San Marzano tomatoes since January 2016, you would fall within the proposed class as pleaded, but no class has been certified and no claims process exists at this stage.