Refined or Redefined?
In 2020, Raw Garden—via its parent company Central Coast Agriculture, Inc.—was sued in the San Francisco Superior Court for allegedly mislabeling vape cartridges marketed as “Refined Live Resin.” Plaintiffs claimed that, rather than containing true live-resin extracts, the cartridges actually comprised distillate with reintroduced terpenes. Manzuri Law+2DabConnection+2
What Is Live Resin?
Live resin is an extract derived from fresh-frozen cannabis biomass, designed to preserve the plant’s native cannabinoid and terpene profiles. It is prized for flavor, aroma, and the so-called “entourage effect.” By contrast, distillate is processed to isolate THC (or other cannabinoids), often stripping away much of the terpene complexity and plant matter before terpenes are added back in. DabConnection+1
What Raw Garden Allegedly Did
The class-action complaint alleges:
-
Raw Garden marketed cartridges under labels such as “Refined Live Resin™,” suggesting a product consistent with the live-resin extraction process. DabConnection+1
-
Plaintiffs asserted that the actual extraction process involved distilling live resin, thereby removing many of the original organic compounds, then adding back terpenes post-distillation—meaning the final product did not qualify as true live resin. Manzuri Law+1
-
Consumers paid a premium price based on the understanding that they were purchasing “live resin,” though they claim they would have paid less had they known the product was essentially distillate. Future4200
-
Causes of action included false advertising, negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied warranty, and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Manzuri Law+1
Legal Implications and Industry Impact
The case underscores increasing regulatory scrutiny in the cannabis extract market. The complaint highlights how terminology—such as “live resin,” “refined live resin,” and “terp saturated”—can mislead consumers. It prompts questions about processing transparency, extraction methods, and how products are packaged and marketed. Respect My Region
For brands, it signals heightened risk: extraction claims must align with documented processes, lab results, and consumer expectations. For regulators, it underlines the need for clearer definitions and labeling standards. The broader market—budtenders, consumers, and cultivators alike—is now watching how extraction terms are used and vetted.
Why It Matters
This suit matters because “live resin” carries market premium and perceived quality. When a brand markets an extract as live resin—but conducted further processing that arguably changes its classification—it creates both consumer trust issues and legal exposure. The case also raises a broader point: as cannabis becomes mainstream, legacy jargon and underground extraction practices must meet regulated standards of truth in advertising.
YOUTUBE VIDEO
— Nugg Notes
sources:
- manzurilaw.com/the-cannabis-c…
- dabconnection.com/class-action-r…
- future4200.com/t/class-action…
0 comments