 I.  Glyphosate and the Enzyme It Targets   22.  Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is a non-selective biocide, meaning  that it will kill most plants and many simple organisms. Unlike selective biocides, glyphosate  cannot be used on most conventional lawns, as it would kill grass that has not been genetically  modified.    46.  All of the foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein.   47.  This action is maintainable as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of  the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   48.  Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of a Class defined as follows:  Class: All consumers who purchased Roundup Products containing the statement  “Glyphosate targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets” on the  labeling in the United States within the applicable statute of limitations.   60.  All of the foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein.   61.  Plaintiff Jones brings this cause of action on behalf of members of the Missouri  Sub-Class.   62.  This cause of action is brought pursuant to the Missouri Merchandising Practices  Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.010 et seq. (“MMPA”).   63.  The MMPA provides that: “The act, use or employment by any person of any  deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, unfair practice or the  concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact in connection with the sale or  advertisement of any merchandise in trade or commerce . . . in or from the state of Missouri, is  declared to be an unlawful practice.” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.020(1).   64.  Pursuant to 15 C.S.R. § 60-7.020, “A seller shall not make a representation or  statement of fact in an advertisement that is false or has the capacity to mislead prospective  purchasers.”    76.  All of the foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein.   77.  Plaintiff Bonilla brings this cause of action on behalf of members of the New York  Sub-Class.   78.  This cause of action is brought pursuant to New York General Business Law § 349.   79.  Defendants, in selling Roundup Products in the State of New York, have engaged  in a consumer-oriented business practice or act.   80.  Defendants’ labeling and advertising of Roundup Products with the statement that  “Glyphosate targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets” misrepresents, tends to  mislead, and omits material facts regarding the nature of Roundup.   Unjust Enrichment  (On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)  135.  All of the foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein.  136.  Plaintiffs bring this claim on behalf of the Class and the State Sub-Classes set forth  herein.  137.  This cause of action is pleaded in the alternative to Plaintiffs’ contract-based claims.  138.  As the intended, direct, and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Defendants  have been unjustly enriched through sales of Roundup Products at the expense of Plaintiffs and  the Class Members.   139.  Under the circumstances, it would be against equity and good conscience to permit  Defendants to retain the ill-gotten benefits that they received from Plaintiffs and the Class  Members, in light of the fact that the Roundup Products they purchased were not what Defendants  purported them to be.   Violation of New York General Business Law § 349  (On Behalf of Plaintiff Bonilla and the New York Sub-Class)   Violations of New York’ General Business Law § 350  (On Behalf of Plaintiff Bonilla and the New York Sub-Class)   Violation of Missouri Merchandising Practices Act  (On Behalf of Plaintiff Jones and the Missouri Sub-Class)   Violations of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act  (On Behalf of Plaintiff Yee and the California Sub-Class)  