A federal court in New Jersey has reportedly refused to seal information about a proposed settlement involving putative class claims that the manufacturers of “Pirate’s Booty” and “Veggie Booty” food products misrepresented their nutritional labeling information. Schatz-Bernstein v. Keystone Food Prods., Inc., No. 08-3079 (D.N.J., order entered April 17, 2009). The snacks were allegedly marketed as containing only 2.5 grams of fat and 120 calories per serving, when they actually contained nearly four times the fat and were 25 percent higher in calories. The plaintiff alleges breach of express warranty, unjust enrichment and a violation of consumer protection laws. According to a news source, the defendants sought to seal settlement details that the plaintiff allegedly published improperly. The plaintiff has apparently maintained that the defendants reneged on the agreement. Denying the defendants’ motion to seal, the court reportedly ruled that the defendants wrongly classified their settlement discussions with the court…
Category Archives Issue 303
A federal court in Illinois, presiding over consolidated multidistrict litigation claims against McDonald’s Corp. for allegedly advertising its French fries as gluten-, wheat- and dairy-free while actually using small amounts of hydrolyzed wheat bran and casein in them, has denied plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. In re McDonald’s French Fries Litig., MDL No. 1784 (N.D. Ill., decided May 6, 2009. The court determined that the class definition was indefinite and overbroad, the proposed class would be unmanageable, and individual issues would predominate over common ones. The plaintiffs, who alleged violations of all 50 states’ and the District of Columbia’s consumer fraud and/or deceptive trade practices acts, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment, sought to certify a nationwide class of all persons “who purchased Potato Products from McDonald’s restaurants on or after February 27, 2002 through February 7, 2006 and who at the time of purchase had been medically diagnosed with…
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a conviction under the identity theft law requires a showing that those presenting false identification documents to employers knew they actually belonged to another real person. According to Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the unanimous Court, the law was intended to crack down on classic identity theft, for example, where a defendant uses another person’s information to get access to that person’s bank account. Prosecutors have been using the law, which calls for a mandatory prison term, against immigrant workers to get them to plead guilty to lesser immigration charges and accept prompt deportation. After the Court issued its ruling on May 4, 2009, the manager of a meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa, raided in May 2008, sought to withdraw her plea to a charge of aggravated identity theft for allegedly helping illegal immigrants get jobs at the plant with documents she knew…
The Kansas Senate will apparently not try to override former Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius’s veto of a bill that would have required a disclaimer on dairy products made without artificial growth hormones. Sebelius, recently confirmed as U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, vetoed the bill in late April 2009 reportedly because it would have made it more difficult for consumers to get clear information. “Supporters of the bill claim it’s necessary to protect consumers from false or misleading information,” she was quoted as saying. “Yet there has been overwhelming opposition by consumer groups, small dairy producers and retailers to this proposed legislation.” Under the bill, manufacturers that have stated their product is not from cows supplemented with the genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH or rbST) would have had to document the claim and put a disclaimer on the product label. State Senator Marci Francisco, (D-Lawrence) a vocal opponent…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has published hazard identification materials for bisphenol A in advance of a July 15, 2009, meeting at which the agency will consider whether to list the substance under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) as a chemical known to the state to cause reproductive harm. Written comments are requested by June 30, 2009. If bisphenol A is listed, manufacturers of products sold in the state containing the chemical will have to provide consumers appropriate warnings. The May 2009 draft of “Evidence on the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity of Bisphenol A” observes that the substance “is produced in large quantities for use primarily in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins . . . used in certain food and drink packaging.” According to the draft, detectable levels of the chemical “have been found in the general population.” While human studies are apparently “of…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) apparently failed to meet its 2007-08 goals for auditing food-safety inspections that states did on its behalf, according to a news source. State agencies apparently do half of FDA’s food inspections, and FDA aims to audit 7 percent to make sure states reach a satisfactory standard. But FDA fell short of its goal in 17 of 39 states, according to FDA data. In five states, including Kansas, FDA did no audits. But data show that FDA’s performance has apparently improved. For example, data for the 2006-07 contract year show its audit goal was unmet in 21 of 37 states, with no audits performed in eight states. In 1998, the FDA reportedly did no audits in 21 of 38 states. “We don’t meet our target ever year, but . . . we’re looking at continuous improvement,” Richard Barnes, FDA director of federal-state relations, was quoted…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a public meeting May 1, 2009, designed to find ways to prevent, detect and address the adulteration of food, pet food, dietary supplements, medical devices, and cosmetics for economic reasons that pose the greatest public health risk. FDA invited testimony on Economically Motivated Adulteration (EMA) from industry representatives, organizations and stakeholders. The agency requests comments on EMA by August 1, 2009. See Federal Register, April 6, 2009.
12
