Under the UCL and FAL, if a product’s front label is plausibly misleading to a reasonable consumer, then the court does not consider the back label at the pleadings stage. The back label may be considered if the front label is ambiguous. Even if the front label is susceptible to two or more meanings, it is treated as unambiguous if plaintiff has plausibly alleged that a reasonable consumer would view the label as having one unambiguous (and deceptive) meaning. Here, the front label on a package of baby wipes featured the words “plant-based wipes” and “natural care®” which the plaintiff plausibly alleged a consumer would take to mean it had no artificial ingredients. So back label clarifications could not defeat the plaintiff’s complaint at the pleadings stage. However, when defendant added an asterisk following “plant-based” and noted below that plant-based ingredients were 70% of the contents, the labeling could not mislead a reasonable consumer, and so claims as to the asterisked products were properly dismissed.