Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Input: Minute Maid can be sued over juice label, highest court says 
  
 The U.S. Supreme Court said Thursday that a competitor can sue Minute Maid for calling one of its drinks "Pomegranate Blueberry," although pomegranate and blueberry juices make up only one-200th of its contents. 
  
 In reinstating the lawsuit, the court said federal law allows food and beverage companies to sue their rivals for mislabeling. 
  
 The suit by Pom Wonderful, which sells pomegranate juices, had been dismissed two years ago by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That court said federal law leaves labeling decisions up to the Food and Drug Administration and does not authorize competing companies to sue for false labeling or advertising. 
  
 The Supreme Court disagreed, in a ruling that opens the door to private as well as government enforcement of laws against misleading food labels. 
  
 "The FDA ... does not have the same perspective or expertise in assessing market dynamics that day-to-day competitors possess," said Justice Anthony Kennedy in the 8-0 ruling. "Their awareness of unfair competition practices may be far more immediate and accurate than that of agency rule-makers and regulators." 
  
 Kennedy said allowing suits by rival companies for mislabeling products should benefit consumers. 
  
 The consumer-advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest praised the ruling, saying the court had recognized that food companies "don't have a safe haven from being sued for deception just by complying with FDA's minimal regulations." 
  
 The center said the ruling should apply as well to its own lawsuits against makers of "fruit snacks" or "whole grain" breads that actually had little fruit or whole grain. But Los Angeles attorney Dale Giali, who represents businesses, said most consumer lawsuits against the food industry are based on state laws and would not be protected by Thursday's decision. 
  
 Minute Maid's parent company, Coca-Cola, said it was "committed to clear labeling that fully complies with FDA regulations." When the suit goes to trial, the company said, the evidence "will show that our product was not the cause of Pom's poor sales." 
  
 The "Pomegranate Blueberry" drink, introduced in 2007, contains 0.3 percent pomegranate juice and 0.2 percent blueberry juice, and otherwise consists mostly of apple and grape juices, which cost less to make. The label invites consumers to "Help Nourish Your Brain" and features "Pomegranate Blueberry" in large letters, followed by "Flavored Blend of 5 Juices" in smaller print. 
  
 The Obama administration took a midway position in the case, arguing that federal law allows companies to challenge misleading statements in a food or beverage label but not the name of a rival juice product, which is subject to FDA approval. The court said the law doesn't limit the scope of false-labeling suits, but didn't say whether a company could defend against a suit on the grounds that its product name was FDA-approved. ||||| POM Wonderful sued Coca-Cola over its Minute Maid product containing 0.3% pomegranate juice. (Photo: POM Wonderful) 
  
 WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a pomegranate by any other name could be a cheat. 
  
 The justices said Coca-Cola can be sued for false advertising by labeling as "Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices" a drink containing just 0.3% pomegranate juice. 
  
 Their decision was a victory for POM Wonderful, makers of 100% pomegranate juice, as well as pomegranate lovers everywhere. POM had sued Coke, makers of Minute Maid juices, under a 1946 law intended to prevent companies from claiming that impostors are the real thing. 
  
 Justice Anthony Kennedy's opinion cited Coke's "practices that allegedly mislead and trick consumers, all to the injury of competitors." 
  
 The 8-0 ruling (Justice Stephen Breyer recused himself) is likely to have a broader impact on the clash between free enterprise and false advertising. 
  
 "Food and beverage companies should really start rethinking their labels at this point, to the extent that they are relying on the current guidelines that allow for the kind of language that Coca-Cola has been employing," said David Ter Molen, a lawyer and author of the Food Identity Blog. 
  
 "We can expect more vigorous litigation between competitors, as well as more class actions arising from consumer product labeling issues," said Dan Silverman, former general counsel at POM Wonderful. 
  
 The case pitted two federal laws against each other. POM cited the Lanham Act, which permits a competitor to sue for false or misleading advertising. Coke relied on the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which prohibits misbranding and is enforced by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations. 
  
 The relatively dry ruling (for such a juicy case): Agency regulations cannot render the false advertising law impotent. 
  
 POM's attorney, Seth Waxman, had contended during oral arguments in April that Coke's product contains just an "eye-dropper" of pomegranate juice. "It amounts to a teaspoon in a half gallon" of what otherwise is mostly less expensive apple and grape juices, he said. 
  
 Coke argued that FDA regulations permit naming products by their minority contents. It said the FDA had the ultimate authority in this area, not state governments. 
  
 But that argument didn't convince the justices, who said the FDA's main role is overseeing health and safety, not the marketplace. 
  
 Kennedy, whose California roots also are home to the victorious pomegranate, called Coke's label "misleading" and "deceptive" during oral arguments. He went so far as to admit he himself had been duped. 
  
 "Don't make me feel bad," Kennedy said, "because I thought that this was pomegranate juice." 
  
 Follow @richardjwolf on Twitter. 
  
 Correction: An earlier version of this story had the wrong date for the ruling. 
  
 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1pME5sc |||||
Output:
The US Supreme Court has waded into a juicy suit: It yesterday ruled that POM Wonderful is free to sue Coca-Cola's Minute Maid over the latter's "Pomegranate Blueberry" juice labels. Pomegranate and blueberry juices make up just 0.3% and 0.2%, respectively, of the drink's contents—or the equivalent of "a teaspoon in a half gallon," POM's attorney argued, per USA Today. Smaller lettering notes it's a "Flavored Blend of 5 Juices," with the bulk of that being cheaper ingredients like apple and grape juices. The suit was initially dismissed two years ago by a lower court that ruled labeling decisions fell under the FDA's purview, and that federal law didn't allow rivals to sue over false labeling. But the FDA "does not have the same perspective or expertise in assessing market dynamics that day-to-day competitors possess," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in the 8-0 ruling, calling Minute Maid's labels "deceptive." Coca-Cola, for its part, asserted its commitment to "clear labeling," and said that it would become evident at trial that "our product was not the cause of POM's poor sales." The San Francisco Chronicle sees the ruling as opening "the door to private as well as government enforcement of laws against misleading food labels." (POM has itself been criticized for making deceptive claims.)