A company that makes and sells a proprietary blend of purported “wellness” herbs as part of its line of gourmet coffee, teas and hot chocolates has sued one of its former independent business owners/operators (IBOs) alleging, among other matters, disparagement, breach of a confidential performance agreement and non-competition clause, and the misappropriation of trade secrets. SereniGy Global, Inc. v. Mendoza, No. 13-08243CA04 (Fla. Cir. Ct., 11th Cir., Dade Cty., filed March 6, 2013). According to the complaint, the company relies on a network of IBOs to market and advertise its products and signed a performance agreement with the defendant to do so in March 2012. By October, the company allegedly “received information that Defendant had been making slanderous, derogatory and disparaging remarks about Plaintiff and its CEO in violation” of the agreement, was “divulging confidential information to a third-party,” and “had been disloyal and involved in moral turpitude by advising…
Category Archives Issue 474
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in a California state court against California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which in January 2013 proposed listing the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) as a reproductive toxicant under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). ACC v. OEHHA, No. ___ (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., filed March 1, 2013). Further details about OEHHA’s proposed BPA listing appear in Issue 468 of this Update. According to ACC, the agency’s scientific advisory panel, relying on the same document that OEHHA claims supports the listing—the National Toxicology Program’s Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (NTP-CERHR) Monograph on the Potential Human Reproductive and Developmental Effects of Bisphenol A—unanimously concluded in July 2009 that BPA does not satisfy the criteria for listing developmental toxicants under Prop. 65. NTP-CERHR apparently concluded that “the…
According to news sources, a federal jury in Texas has determined that Ralcorp Holdings, which makes bowl-shaped tortilla chips sold as store brands, did not violate trademarks or infringe patents on an allegedly similar product made by Frito-Lay and sold as TOSTITOS SCOOPS!®. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. v. Medallion Foods, Inc., No. 12-00074 (E.D. Tex., decided March 1, 2013). Additional information about the lawsuit can be found in Issue 427 of this Update. Frito-Lay had sought an order requiring that the defendant cease making BOWLZ® and CUPZ® chips and $4.5 million in damages. See Businessweek, March 4, 2013; The Kansas City Star, March 5, 2013.
The Seattle City Council has unanimously adopted a bill requiring 50 percent of the food and beverage offerings in vending machines operated on city property to be those deemed “healthier” and “healthiest” as defined by Public Health Seattle & King County’s “King County Healthy Vending Guidelines.” According to the guidelines, “healthier” items include baked potato chips, frozen fruit juice bars, whole grain crackers, and pretzels, while the “healthiest” category includes fresh or dehydrated fruit and vegetables, whole grain cereals, low-fat popcorn, unsalted nuts or seeds, and fat-free or low-fat plain yogurt. See Q13Fox.com, March 4, 2013. Meanwhile, Oregon state legislators have proposed legislation (H.B. 3403) that would establish nutritional requirements for the food and beverage offerings in vending machines in public buildings. Among other things, the proposal would limit vended items to those not containing (i) more than 200 calories per package; (ii) more than 35 percent of total calories…
During a hearing to discuss a prohibition on energy drinks in the city, a Chicago City Council committee reportedly decided to further consider the matter at a later date before taking a vote. The proposed ordinances include one introduced in January 2013 by Alderman Edward Burke that would prohibit the sale of drinks with 180 or more milligrams of caffeine and containing the alleged stimulants taurine or guarana. Committee Chair George Cardenas and Alderman William Burns previously introduced another proposal that would prohibit the sale of energy drinks to anyone younger than age 21. Details about Burke’s proposal appear in Issue 468 of this Update. See Chicago Tribune, March 6, 2013; TimeNewsFeed.com, March 7, 2013.
Vermont’s House Agriculture Committee has reportedly passed by an 8-3 vote legislation (H.112) that would require producers to label raw agricultural and processed food products that are genetically engineered. Milk, meat and ready-to-eat foods would be exempt from the labeling. The bill now moves to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration. If passed, the legislation would evidently take effect 18 months after at least two other states adopt similar proposals, or 24 months after its passage in Vermont—whichever comes first. Previous versions of GMO labeling bills introduced in Vermont in 2011 and 2012 were defeated. See Addison County Independent, March 4, 2013.
A panel commissioned by Ontario’s Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care has issued a March 2013 report outlining a three-part strategy designed to curb rising childhood obesity rates by supporting families, changing the food environment and creating healthy communities. Titled “No Time to Wait: The Healthy Kids Strategy,” the report specifically recommends, among other things, that regulators (i) “ban the marketing of high-calorie, low-nutrient foods, beverages and snacks to children under age 12”; (ii) “ban point-of-sale promotions and displays of high-calorie, low-nutrient foods and beverages in retail settings, beginning with sugar-sweetened beverages”; (iii) “require all restaurants, including fast food outlets and retail grocery stores, to list the calories in each item on their menus and to make this information visible on menu boards”; and (iv) “develop a single standard guideline for food and beverages served or sold where children play and learn.” “Ontario is at a tipping point,” concluded the…
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has announced an April 9, 2013, scientific meeting to discuss its draft opinion on the re-evaluation of aspartame (E951). Issued by the agency’s Scientific Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources Added to Food (ANS Panel), the re-evaluation declined to revise the current Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for aspartame after concluding that the substance and its breakdown products “pose no toxicity concern for consumers at current levels of exposure.” Additional details about this conclusion appear in Issue 466 of this Update. The follow-up meeting seeks to clarify any comments received during the draft opinion’s consultation period, which ended February 15. Before adopting its final opinion on aspartame, the ANS Panel will take into account these responses and meeting discussions, as well as issue a separate report that outlines these proceedings. EFSA has asked “scientific experts in the field of food safety and parties who…
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have agreed to conduct a health risk assessment of phenylbutazone after officials reportedly discovered the anti-inflammatory drug “in a small number of horse carcasses intended for the food chain.” According to a March 7, 2013, news release, the European Commission requested the assessment as part of an EU-wide investigation into beef contaminated with horsemeat. “[U]sed sparingly in human medicine for the treatment of severe inflammatory conditions where no other treatment is considered suitable,” phenylbutazone is also approved for veterinary use but only in non-food producing animals such as dogs and sport horses. EFSA thus considers the drug a contaminant in food and will work with EMA to determine whether residues found in horsemeat pose any health risks to consumers. To this end, the agencies will consider “both the risk posed from consumption of the horsemeat itself as well as…
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reopened the comment period for its 2005 interim final rule on the “Use of Materials Derived From Cattle in Human Food and Cosmetics,” which prohibited the use of certain cow components to prevent the potential risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in human food and cosmetics. The interim final rule stated that a cow’s small intestine was safe for use in human food and cosmetics provided the distal ileum was removed. According to the agency, new scientific data confirms the presence of low levels of BSE in other parts of the cow’s intestine, including the proximal ileum. Interested parties can comment on the new studies until May 13, 2013. See Federal Register, March 4, 2013.
