California suit claims Cento falsely labels tomatoes as San Marzano certified

Two California residents have sued Cento Fine Foods, accusing the company of selling tomato products as San Marzano certified when, they allege, the tomatoes are not the real thing. The proposed class-action case, filed May 4 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, says Cento’s labeling is “false, misleading, and unfair” and claims the product lacks the taste, consistency and other physical traits buyers expect from authentic San Marzano tomatoes.

The dispute reaches beyond one jar on a grocery shelf. San Marzano tomatoes are a protected Italian specialty from Campania, prized for their sweet, concentrated flavor and tied to a certification system that helps justify the premium they command. Under the San Marzano PDO, or DOP, system, the tomatoes are overseen by Il Consorzio di Tutela del Pomodoro San Marzano DOP, which says authentic fruit is grown exclusively in the Sarnese-Nocerino area and produced under strict quality controls. The consortium says the designation received PDO recognition in 1996, making it one of the clearest examples of how geographic origin and regulatory oversight can become part of the brand itself.

That is exactly why the case matters for shoppers. In the upscale food market, “San Marzano” is not just a varietal name but a signal of provenance, process and scarcity. The plaintiffs are arguing that Cento’s marketing trades on that signal without delivering the certification consumers believe they are buying. Cento has said it stopped seeking consortium certification in the 2010s over labeling requirements, though the complaint says that shift followed an investigation into counterfeit DOP labeling. Cento’s own materials have said its tomatoes are certified by Agri-Cert and traceable by lot code to the exact field where they were picked.

Cento is no stranger to this fight. The company faced two federal lawsuits over its San Marzano claims in 2019, and a federal judge dismissed a similar New York case in 2020, finding that a reasonable consumer would not insist on consortium certification specifically. That reasoning may shape the latest challenge, but the new suit returns the same core question to court: when a brand sells the aura of authenticity, how much proof must stand behind the label? Cento’s lawyer told ABC News the case is “entirely without merit” and said the company would defend it vigorously.