The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) has requested public comments on the services provided to support “the marketing of grain and related commodities.” The agency seeks input from producers, handlers, processors, food manufacturers, exporters, importers, and other industry stakeholders to determine how GIPSA “can best facilitate the marketing of grains, oilseeds, rice, pulses, and related products or products made from them, including co-products of ethanol production, commonly referred to as distillers’ grains, based on market-identified quality attributes.” In particular, GIPSA asks respondents to consider the following questions: (i) “Are there any market-identified quality attributes that GIPSA does not currently describe (or provide testing) that would facilitate the marketing of grain, oilseeds, and related products?”; (ii) “What role should GIPSA take, if any, in standardizing the testing of inputs and outputs of ethanol coproduct processing?”; and (iii) “Are there any other services that GIPSA could offer to facilitate the…
Posts By Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has published a report criticizing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) lack of action on food dyes. Titled Seeing Red: Time for Action on Food Dyes, the report points to studies allegedly linking food-dye consumption to behavioral issues in children—particularly those diagnosed with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)—concluding that FDA “has failed to protect or even inform consumers of the risks of dyes to children.” “We estimate that over half a million children in the United States suffer adverse behavioral reactions after ingesting food dyes, with an estimated cost exceeding $5 billion per year, using information cited by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and a recent meta-analysis sponsored by an arm of the food industry,” states CSPI. “A study of food labels in one supermarket found that more than 90 percent of child oriented candies, fruit-flavored snacks, and…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has extended from February 16 to February 22, 2016, the comment period regarding requirements for fermented and hydrolyzed foods or those containing fermented or hydrolyzed ingredients that carry the “gluten-free” claim. The proposed rule would apply to foods such as sauerkraut, yogurt, pickles, cheese, green olives, vinegar, and FDA-regulated beers. Intended to address the uncertainty of interpreting test methods in terms of intact gluten, the finalized rule would mandate manufacturers to maintain records demonstrating: (i) “the food meets the requirements of the gluten-free labeling final rule prior to fermentation or hydrolysis”; (ii) “the manufacturer has adequately evaluated its process for any potential gluten cross-contact”; and (iii) “where a potential for gluten cross-contact has been identified, the manufacturer has implemented measures to prevent the introduction of gluten into the food during the manufacturing process.” The agency also intends to evaluate the compliance of distilled…
A research article examining the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS) and Palatable Motives Eating Scale (PEMS) has concluded that together these tools “offer a rigorous way to evaluate whether an addictive process contributes to certain eating disorders, such as obesity and binge eating.” Jose Manuel Lerma-Cabrera, et al., “Food addiction as a new piece of the obesity framework,” Nutrition Journal, January 2016. Summarizing various “food addiction” studies, the authors posit that these models suggest “certain highly processed foods can have a high addictive potential and may be responsible for some cases of obesity and eating disorders.” In particular, the article notes that despite the evidence for food addiction, “it is highly unlikely that all foods have addictive potential.” It claims that manufacturers “have designed processed foods by adding sugar, salt, or fat, which can maximize the reinforcing properties of traditional foods (fruits, vegetables). The high palatability (hedonic value) that this…
A new study suggests that warning labels on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) could dissuade parents from purchasing these products for children. Christina A. Roberto, et al., “The Influence of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning Labels on Parents’ Choices,” Pediatrics, February 2016. Based on research involving tobacco warning labels, the study aimed to determine if SSB warning labels could (i) educate consumers about potential “health harms” “above and beyond” existing calorie declarations; (ii) “influence parents’ intentions to buy SSBs for their children”; and (iii) “influence parents’ perceptions and intentions toward nonlabeled beverages.” It also evaluated warning label phrasing and “parents’ beliefs about proposals to put warning labels on SSBs.” Surveying 2,381 primary caregivers of children ages 6 to 11, researchers randomly assigned parents to one of six conditions: “(1) no warning label (control); (2) calorie label; or (3–6) 1 of 4 text versions of a warning label (eg, Safety Warning: Drinking beverages with…
Three major grocers—Albertsons Companies, Hy-Vee and The Kroger Co.—have reportedly filed a lawsuit against three tuna companies alleging they conspired to fix prices of canned tuna. The companies join other grocers and consumers in pursuing damages from Tri-Union Seafoods, Starkist and Bumble Bee Foods for alleged price fixing, a practice the plaintiffs argue began in 2008 and continued until July 2015. See Undercurrent News, January 11, 2016. Details about lawsuits by other grocers appear in Issue 574 of this Update, while information about the consolidation of the suits by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation appears in Issue 588. Issue 590
Idahoan Foods LLC has filed a lawsuit against Basic American Inc. alleging the company’s line of potato products marketed under the name “Buttery Home-Style” infringes on Idahoan’s rights to “Buttery Homestyle,” its brand of potato products. Idahoan Foods LLC v. Basic Am. Inc., No. 16-0005 (D. Idaho, filed January 6, 2016). Idahoan’s trademark application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was filed in May 2015 and remains pending, but the company argues that it has used “Buttery Homestyle” commercially since 2003. Idahoan notified Basic American in December 2015 of its allegedly superior rights to the mark; the complaint asserts that Basic American then filed a lawsuit in California federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that “Buttery Home-Style” does not infringe “Buttery Homestyle.” Idahoan seeks an injunction, destruction of the infringing mark, damages and maturation of its trademark application. Issue 590
Chobani has filed a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that its advertisements claiming competitor Dannon’s yogurt contains chlorine are not false or misleading, prompting Dannon to file a counterclaim seeking a preliminary injunction. Chobani v. The Dannon Co., Inc., No. 16-0030 (N.D.N.Y., complaint filed January 8, 2016, counterclaim filed January 11, 2016). Chobani’s complaint details its campaign, launched January 6, 2016, that asserts “Dannon’s Light & Fit Greek Yogurt contains sucralose, an artificial sweetener processed with added chlorine.” The company seeks a declaration that its claims are not false, misleading, disparaging or deceptive under the Lanham Act or New York state law. Dannon’s response argues that the ad campaign “has been misinforming consumers about the health and safety of Dannon’s products while exaggerating the relative health benefits of its own product.” The counterclaim defends sucralose and its use, arguing that it “is not ‘bad’ or harmful.” Further, “Chobani’s campaign falsely…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruling that a method of enzymatic hydrolysis of soy fiber for use in creating food additives is not patentable because it would have been obvious in light of previous inventions. In re Urbanski, No. 15-1272 (Fed. Cir., order entered January 8, 2016). The plaintiffs challenged the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s denial of a patent for their technique of creating food additives from soy fiber, which the examiner found to be “readily combinable” from two prior inventions. The Federal Circuit agreed with the examiner’s and appeals board’s determinations that a person of ordinary skill would have expected that adjusting the process as the plaintiffs did would have yielded the results they reached. Accordingly, the court affirmed the prior dismissal. Issue 590
A Kentucky federal court has granted a motion to dismiss an action against the owner of Duck Dynasty trademarks alleging infringement based on jurisdictional issues. Chinook USA v. Duck Commander, Inc., No. 14-1015 (W.D. Ky., Louisville Div., order entered January 8, 2015). In 2014, Duck Commander licensed the rights to several trademarks related to Duck Dynasty, including “Duck Commander Family Foods,” “Uncle Si” and “Si Robertson,” to Chinook for use on several types of beverages. Chinook later learned that Duck Commander also licensed the same rights to other companies, including Go-Time and Checkered Flag Business. Chinook sued, arguing that it held exclusive rights to the use of the trademarks on beverages. In “colorful” filings recounting “Bill Russell’s collegiate basketball career, the Scottish jurist and poet Sir Walter Scott’s Marmion, and Jackie Gleason’s role in an short-lived television series from the late 1940s,” Chinook argued that Duck Commander and the beverage…
