1 KRISTIN K. MAYES ATTORNEY GENERAL 2 (Firm State Bar No. 14000) 3 DYLAN JONES (No. 034185) 4 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 2005 North Central Avenue 5 Phoenix, AZ 85004-1545 6 Telephone: (602) 542-5210 Facsimile: (602) 542-4377 7 Email: consumer@azag.gov 8 Attorneys for the State of Arizona 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA 10 IN MARICOPA COUNTY 11 STATE OF ARIZONA, EX REL. KRIS Case No.: CV2025-029649 12 MAYES, Attorney General, CONSENT JUDGMENT 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 (Assigned to Hon. Jennifer Ryan-Touhill) REYNOLDS CONSUMER PRODUCTS, 16 INC and REYNOLDS CONSUMER 17 PRODUCTS, LLC, 18 Defendants. 19 20 The State of Arizona, ex rel. Kristin K. Mayes, Attorney General (the “State”), filed a 21 Complaint alleging violations of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, A.R.S. §§ 44-1521 to -1534 22 (the “ACFA”), (“the Complaint”) and Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. and Reynolds 23 Consumer Products, LLC (the “Defendants” or “Reynolds”) have been advised of the right to a 24 trial in this matter and have waived the same. Defendants admit the jurisdiction of this Court over 25 the subject matter and parties, stipulate that this Court may enter the following Findings of Fact, 26 Conclusions of Law, and Order, consents to the entry of this Consent Judgment to compromise 27 and settle claims as set forth in the Complaint in connection with an investigation under the 28 ACFA and not out of any admission of guilt, wrongdoing, violation, or sanction and 1 acknowledges that this Court will retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing this Consent 2 Judgment. 3 PARTIES 4 1. The State is authorized to bring this action under the ACFA. 5 2. Defendant Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. is a publicly traded Delaware 6 corporation with its principal place of business in Lake Forest, Illinois. 7 3. Defendant Reynolds Consumer Products, LLC is a limited liability company 8 organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Lake 9 Forest, Illinois. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. and owns 10 the “Hefty” trademark. 11 4. All events, acts and practices described in, and relevant to, this Consent Judgment 12 took place in Arizona. 13 5. This Court has jurisdiction over the Complaint and the parties necessary for the 14 Court to enter this Consent Judgment and any orders hereafter appropriate pursuant to 15 A.R.S. § 44-1528 and this Consent Judgment. 16 6. Venue is proper in Maricopa County pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-401. 17 FINDINGS OF FACT 18 7. Reynolds sells Hefty-branded plastic bags through online commerce, big box 19 retailers, and grocery stores located in Arizona and throughout the country. 20 8. Among these bags, Reynolds sells Hefty bags that are transparent blue or clear. 21 9. These transparent blue and clear bags are generally and not currently recyclable in 22 Arizona’s municipal recycling programs or material recovery facilities (“MRFs”). 23 10. While a small handful of MRFs in Arizona allow shredded paper to be bagged in 24 clear bags, Arizona MRFs do not currently allow Reynolds’ blue and clear bags to be used in 25 conjunction with mixed curbside pickup. 26 Original Recycling Bag Packaging (2019 to 2022) 27 11. Since at least 2019, Defendant Reynolds has sold Hefty transparent blue and clear 28 bags in 13- and 30-gallon options. These bags were labeled “RECYCLING.” -2- 1 12. The box of all “Recycling” varieties and sizes included an image of either a 2 transparent blue or clear bag filled with items including recyclable bottles and/or cans. 3 13. The back of the packaging stated: “HEFTY RECYCLING BAGS ARE PERFECT 4 FOR ALL YOUR RECYCLING NEEDS.” The back label also stated: “DESIGNED TO 5 HANDLE ALL TYPES OF RECYCLABLES,” “TRANSPARENT FOR QUICK SORTING 6 AND CURBSIDE IDENTIFICATION,” and “DEVELOPED FOR USE IN MUNICIPAL 7 RECYCLING PROGRAMS WHERE APPLICABLE,” which appeared under an image of a 8 recycling truck. 9 14. The “Recycling” bags webpage on the Hefty website included the following 10 statements about the bags: they “[r]educe your environmental impact,” are “designed to handle 11 your heaviest recycling jobs,” and “[t]hese transparent bags make it easy to sort your recyclables 12 and avoid the landfill.” 13 15. Based on these representations, the State filed the Complaint alleging Defendants’ 14 packaging and website were misleading and deceptive because they implied that the bags were 15 recyclable, when, in fact, the bags were not recyclable and putting recyclable contents in the 16 transparent blue and clear bags for curbside pickup could result in the entire bag, including the 17 recyclable contents, being discarded in a landfill instead of recycled. 18 2022 Redesign (2022 to 2024) 19 16. After the Connecticut Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Reynolds alleging 20 the transparent blue and clear trash labeled as “RECYCLING” bags were violations of the 21 Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Reynolds redesigned the packaging. 22 17. The updated packaging continued to use the word “RECYCLING” on the front, 23 and the same images of the bags filled with items including recyclable bottles and/or cans. 24 18. The front and sides of the redesigned packaging included language stating that the 25 bags were “developed for use in municipal recycling programs where applicable” and “contact 26 your local municipality or recycling center to confirm.” 27 19. The back of the updated packaging included the following checked bullet-points 28 under “HEFTY RECYCLING BAGS”: “Developed for Use in Municipal Recycling Programs -3- 1 Where Applicable,” “Designed to Handle All Types of Recyclables,” “Transparent for Quick 2 Sorting and Curbside Identification. Following these claims, at the bottom of the bullet-pointed 3 list, Reynolds disclosed “These bags are not recyclable.” 4 20. The court in State of Connecticut v. Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. granted 5 summary judgment to Reynolds on the State of Connecticut’s claims of willfulness, finding no 6 evidence in the record that Reynolds’ actions were willfully unfair or deceptive. The Connecticut 7 Attorney General’s lawsuit is still pending before a Connecticut court and is not resolved. 8 21. Despite the redesigned packaging and additional disclaimers, the state filed the 9 Complaint alleging Reynolds packaging and website were still misleading and deceptive because 10 Reynolds implied that the bags were recyclable, particularly due to the bags still being called 11 “RECYCLING” bags. 12 2024 Redesign (2024 to Present) 13 22. In 2024, Reynolds redesigned the packaging once again after it entered into a 14 consent judgment with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office regarding Reynolds’ recycling 15 claims under the Minnesota’s False Statement in Advertising Act, Prevention of Consumer Fraud 16 Act, Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and Deceptive Environmental Marketing Claims Act. 17 23. The 2024 rebrand replaced the word “RECYCLING” on the packaging with 18 “CLEAR” or “BLUE,” depending on the color of the bag. 19 24. The front of the third version of the packaging includes the same image of the bags 20 recyclable contents used in previous packaging. 21 25. The back of the packaging now includes the following language in three checked 22 bullet-points: “Developed for use in participating municipal programs only,” “Transparent for 23 quick and easy sorting,” and “These bags are not recyclable.” 24 26. At the time the Complaint was filed in this instant lawsuit, the Defendants’ 25 webpage for the “Clear” and “Blue” bags showed a consumer with a bag of empty recyclable 26 bottles, placing the bag on the curb next to a collection bin which were the same images that had 27 appeared on the webpage for the original “Recycling” bag. As of the date of this Consent 28 Judgment, the “Clear” and “Blue” bags no longer appear on the Hefty website. -4- 1 27. In the Complaint, the State alleges that while the removal of the word “Recycling” 2 on the packaging is an improvement, the current packaging and website is misleading to Arizona 3 consumers, particularly due to the images of “Clear” or “Blue” bags displaying what appear to 4 be recyclable contents contained within the bags. 5 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 6 28. In the Complaint, the State alleges Defendants violated the ACFA by engaging in 7 or directing others to engage in the actions described in paragraphs 11 through 27 above. 8 29. In the Complaint, the State alleges Defendants were acting willfully, as defined by 9 A.R.S. § 44-1531(B), while engaging in the acts, practices, and conduct described in the 10 preceding paragraphs of this Consent Judgment. 11 30. The State and the Defendants desire to resolve fully, under the ACFA, claims set 12 forth in the Complaint by this Consent Judgment and agree to the entry of an order and judgment 13 as follows. 14 ORDER 15 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 16 Injunctive Terms 17 31. The injunctive relief set forth in this Consent Judgment is binding upon any of the 18 following that receive actual notice of this Consent Judgment through personal service or 19 otherwise: (a) Defendants and their subsidiaries; (b) their officers, agents, servants, employees, 20 and attorneys; and (c) those persons in active concert or participation with Defendants or any of 21 their officers, agents, servants, employees, or attorneys. 22 32. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1528: 23 a. Defendants are permanently enjoined from marketing or selling plastic bags 24 labeled as “recycling bags” under the Hefty brand in Arizona, unless the bags are 25 accepted for recycling at a substantial majority of the recycling facilities within the 26 State of Arizona. 27 b. Defendants are enjoined from marketing and advertising Hefty plastic bags as 28 widely accepted by municipal recycling programs in Arizona unless a substantial -5- 1 majority of municipalities within the State actually accept the bags for recycling 2 within their recycling programs. 3 c. Defendants shall follow all applicable rules, statutes, guidelines, agency 4 instructions, practice manuals, and the FTC Green Guides related to environmental 5 marketing claims. 6 d. To the extent Defendants include the transparent blue and/or clear bags on its Hefty 7 website, Defendants shall include language to educate consumers about the limited 8 availability of bagged recyclable pick up, and shall notify consumers that the Hefty 9 blue and clear transparent bags should be used in participating municipal programs 10 only. 11 e. Defendants shall redesign the packaging for the Hefty transparent blue and clear 12 bags to update the image of bags on the packaging as set forth in Attachment A to 13 this Consent Judgment. It is estimated Defendants will expend at least $80,000 and 14 take approximately eighteen months to implement this packaging redesign 15 nationwide. Defendants shall use this redesigned packaging nationwide for all new 16 transparent blue and clear bags until the bags are accepted for recycling at a 17 substantial majority of the recycling facilities within the State of Arizona. 18 Defendants shall have no obligation to recall or remove any existing product for 19 sale in Arizona nor shall defendants be obligated to contact any third party sellers 20 or websites. 21 Payment Terms 22 33. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1528(A)(2), Defendants are jointly and severally liable and 23 obligated to pay to the Attorney General the amount of $30,000 in consumer restitution due no 24 later than ten days after the entry of this Consent Judgment, to be deposited into the Consumer 25 Restitution and Remediation Revolving Fund, pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1531.02(B). The State 26 will have sole discretion as to how and when restitution funds are distributed to consumers and 27 the eligibility of any consumer to receive restitution. In the event that any portion of the restitution 28 ordered herein is not distributed to eligible consumers, such portion will be deposited by the -6- 1 Attorney General’s Office into the Consumer Protection-Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund, 2 pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1531.02(B), and used for the purposes specified in A.R.S. § 44-1531.01. 3 34. Defendants are jointly and severally liable and obligated to pay to the Attorney 4 General the amount of $157,000 as a payment to the State due no later than ten days after the 5 entry of this Consent Judgment, to be deposited into the Consumer Protection-Consumer Fraud 6 Revolving Fund pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1531.01, and used for the purposes set forth therein. 7 35. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1534, Defendants are jointly and severally liable and 8 obligated to pay to the Attorney General the amount of $25,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs due 9 no later than ten days after the entry of this Consent Judgment, to be deposited into the Consumer 10 Protection-Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund pursuant to A.R.S. § 44-1531.01, and used for the 11 purposes set forth therein. 12 36. The payments required herein must be paid by wire transfer according to 13 instructions supplied by the State, or by cashier’s checks or money orders made payable to “The 14 State of Arizona,” and must be delivered, or mailed and postmarked, to: 15 Consumer Protection and Advocacy Section The Office of the Arizona Attorney General 16 2005 North Central Avenue 17 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-1592 18 37. In the event of a material breach of this Consent Judgment, in addition to all other 19 remedies available under Arizona law and the penalties specifically provided under 20 A.R.S. § 44-1532, the State may, in its sole discretion, reopen proceedings and continue with this 21 case as though this Consent Judgment had not been entered, provided that Defendants will be 22 entitled to an offset for any amount actually paid to the State. 23 Release 24 38. The parties acknowledge by the execution hereof that this Consent Judgment 25 constitutes a complete settlement of the allegations contained in this Consent Judgment, and the 26 State agrees not to institute any civil action against the Defendants or their employees or agents 27 for the violations of the ACFA described in the Complaint and/or this Consent Judgment. 28 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the State may institute an action or proceeding to enforce the -7- 1 terms and provisions of this Consent Judgment, take action based on future conduct by 2 Defendants, take action based on past conduct not specified in this Consent Judgment, and/or 3 institute an action or proceeding to prevent the discharge of any debt acquired through this 4 Consent judgment. 5 General Provisions 6 39. Nothing in this Consent Judgment will be construed as an approval by the Attorney 7 General, the Court, the State of Arizona, or any agency thereof of Defendants’ past, present, or 8 future conduct. Defendants must not represent or imply that the Attorney General, the Court, the 9 State of Arizona, or any agency thereof has approved or approves of any of Defendants’ actions 10 or any of Defendants’ past, present or future business practices. 11 40. This Consent Judgment represents the entire agreement between the parties, and 12 there are no representations, agreements, arrangements, or understandings, oral or written, 13 between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Consent Judgment which are not fully 14 expressed herein or attached hereto. 15 41. If any portion of this Consent Judgment is held invalid by operation of law, the 16 remaining terms thereof will not be affected and will remain in full force and effect. 17 42. Jurisdiction is retained by this Court for the purpose of entertaining an application 18 by the State for the enforcement of this Consent Judgment. 19 43. This Consent Judgment is the result of a compromise between the parties. Only the 20 State may seek enforcement of this Consent Judgment. Nothing herein is intended to create a 21 private right of action by other parties. 22 44. This Consent Judgment does not limit the rights of any private party to pursue any 23 remedies allowed by law. 24 45. The effective date of this Consent Judgment is the date that it is entered by the 25 Court. 26 46. This Consent Judgment may be executed by the parties in counterparts and be 27 delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission, or a copy thereof, such constituting an original 28 counterpart hereof, all of which together will constitute one and the same document. -8- 1 47. This Consent Judgment resolves all outstanding claims expressly identified in the 2 Complaint as to Defendants. As no further matters remain pending, this is a final judgment 3 entered pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 54(c). 4 5 DATED this _____ day of February, 2026. 6 7 8 9 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -9- 1 CONSENT TO JUDGMENT 2 1. Defendants acknowledge that they have read the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of 3 Law, and Order, and are aware of their right to a trial in this matter and have waived the same. 4 2. Defendants admit the jurisdiction of this Court, and consent to the entry of the 5 foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order. 6 3. Defendants state that no promise of any kind or nature whatsoever was made to 7 induce them to enter into this Consent Judgment and declare that they have entered into this 8 Consent Judgment voluntarily. 9 4. This Consent Judgment is entered as a result of a compromise between the parties. 10 Only the State may seek enforcement of this Consent Judgment. Nothing herein is intended to 11 create a private right of action by other parties; however, this Consent Judgment does not limit 12 the rights of any private party to pursue any remedies allowed by law. 13 5. Defendants acknowledge that their acceptance of this Consent Judgment is for the 14 purpose of settling the ongoing consumer fraud lawsuit filed by the State, and further 15 acknowledge that this Consent Judgment does not preclude any agency or officer of this State or 16 subdivision thereof from instituting other civil or criminal proceedings as may be appropriate. 17 6. This Consent to Judgment may be executed in counterparts and be delivered by 18 facsimile or electronic transmission, or a copy thereof, such constituting an original counterpart 19 hereof, all of which together will constitute one and the same document. 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// -10- 1 7. Defendants represent and warrant that the person signing below on their behalf is 2 duly appointed and authorized to do so. 3 DATED 13th this _____ day of February, 2026. 4 REYNOLDS CONSUMER PRODUCTS, INC and REYNOLDS CONSUMER 5 PRODUCTS, LLC 6 7 8 Signature: 9 Name: 10 Title: 11 Date: 12 13 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT: 14 KRISTIN K. MAYES SNELL AND WILMER L.L.P. 15 Attorney General 16 17 18 By: 19 Dylan Jones Brett W. Johnson 20 Assistant Attorney General Joseph Kanefield Attorneys for the State of Arizona Attorneys for Defendants 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -11- Attachment A