The Dearborn, Michigan-based attorney who was ordered to remove statements from his Facebook® page opposing a proposed class-action settlement in a case raising allegations that a McDonald’s Corp. franchisee purported to sell halal chicken when some of the products were not prepared according to Islamic law has filed a motion to vacate the order and to extend the period for filing objections or opting-out. Ahmed v. McDonald’s Corp., No. 11-014559 (Mich. Cir. Ct., Wayne Cty., motion filed February 22, 2013). Represented by advocacy group Public Citizen, Majed Moughni claims that the court’s order “was a prior restraint forbidden by the First Amendment.” Additional information about the proposed settlement and Moughni’s criticism of it appear in issues 468 and 471 of this Update. According to the brief accompanying the motion, Moughni, his wife and children have eaten at McDonald’s and are thus members of the class. The brief further contends, “Giving Moughni only…
Category Archives Issue
A U.S. attorney in Illinois has announced charges filed against two companies and five individuals in a five-year investigation of imports that allegedly circumvented $180 million in anti-dumping duties on honey from China and involved purportedly “adulterated” honey containing the antibiotics chloramphenicol and tetracycline. Groeb Farms, Inc., described as the largest industrial honey supplier in the United States, knowingly avoided more than $78.8 million in antidumping duties by buying mislabeled honey imported from China and has agreed to pay a $2 million fine and “to dispose of any illegally-entered Chinese-origin honey in its possession.” It will also institute a corporate compliance program to ensure supply chain integrity and conduct “reasonable inquiries to safeguard against any illegal activity.” Jun Yang, Urbain Tran and Hung Yi Lin were all charged with brokering or transporting illegal Chinese-origin honey in the United States. Yang will plead guilty and has agreed to a fine of $250,000…
A California federal court has dismissed with prejudice claims filed against a yogurt maker and its parent company alleging that its Greek style yogurt product was misbranded under federal food regulations. Smith v. Cabot Creamery Coop., Inc., No. 12-4591 (N.D. Cal., decided February 25, 2013). The putative class plaintiffs alleged that the defendants used whey protein concentrate (WPC) and milk protein concentrate (MPC) as “filler material” to “thicken Cabot Greek and increase its protein content, instead of making Greek yogurt the ‘authentic’ way which involves filtering the liquid whey byproduct during the manufacturing process and keeping only the protein-rich solid portion.” They also alleged that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) forbids the use of WPC and MPC. The defendants moved to dismiss the claims because they were premised on the alleged unlawful use of these ingredients, arguing that FDA allows WPC and MPC to be used lawfully “as optional ingredients…
A federal court in California has denied in part and granted in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss putative class claims that many of their food products are sold with labels that are unlawful and/or mislead consumers. Ivie v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., No. 12-2554 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 25, 2013). Among the products are chewing gum, crackers, granola, fruit punch, cheese, nut mix, lemonade, stuffing mix, Jell-O®, and Easy Mac®. The labels at issue include the following statements: “natural,” “all natural,” “no artificial” colors/sweeteners/flavors/preservatives/ingredients, nutrient content, health claims, “sugar free,” “sugarless,” certain serving sizes, and “evaporated cane juice.” The allegations are also apparently based on products the named plaintiff did not purchase. The court determined that (i) the plaintiff sufficiently alleged an injury in fact by claiming she would not have purchased the products but for the alleged unlawful or misleading labels; (ii) the plaintiff cannot bring claims relating…
A federal court in California has dismissed some of the putative class claims filed against Twining North America, Inc., alleging that the company misled consumers by labeling its green tea products as a “natural source of antioxidants.” Lanovaz v. Twinings N. Am., Inc., No. 12-2646 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 25, 2013). Stricken with leave to amend are claims based on labels or products other than green tea because the named plaintiff alleged that she purchased green tea only. The court disagreed with the defendant that the state law-based claims were preempted, finding that by stating its tea is a “natural source of antioxidants,” the defendant made a nutrient content claim regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and that the plaintiff was seeking to enforce state law identical to federal requirements. So ruling, the court cited an FDA warning letter sent to the company over its alleged “nutrient content…
In a 7–2 vote, lawmakers in Colorado have rejected a bill (H.B.1192) that would have defined “genetically engineered” and required a person selling, distributing or offering food for sale in Colorado to identify genetically engineered (GE) food with the following label: “This product contains genetically engineered material or was produced with genetically engineered material.” The bill was sponsored by Rep. Jeanne Labuda (D-Denver), who, according to a news source, says that consumers deserve to know more about how their food is produced and argues that food producers already have to label foods containing certain additives or allergens. Opponents of the bill, including many farmers and food retailers, reportedly claim that requiring labels for GE foods would significantly affect family farmers and increase the cost of food for all Colorado citizens. “Much of the dialogue surrounding this topic seems to be filled with fear and innuendo, as opposed to being well researched,…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has withdrawn styrene as a potential addition to the list of substances known to the state to cause cancer by means of the Labor Code mechanism. In 2009, a state judge tentatively enjoined its listing after determining that no known evidence supported a finding that styrene is a carcinogen and that its designation as such would likely have a devastating effect on the industry. Widely used in food packaging, styrene plastics are apparently crucial to the transportation and sale of strawberries, raspberries and blueberries, state industries worth more than $1 billion. The court further ruled at the end of 2012 that OEHHA’s reliance on the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s conclusion that styrene is “possibly carcinogenic to human” was insufficient to justify its listing. OEHHA has not reportedly appealed the decision. See InsideEPA.com, February 21, 2013.
California Assembly Member Ian Calderon (D-Whittier) has introduced a bill (A.B. 682) that “would prohibit chicken or turkey sold in any state-owned or state-leased building at food concessions and cafeterias from being ‘plumped’ in any way.” The legislation defines “plumped” poultry as any such product injected with “saltwater, chicken stock, seaweed extract, or some combination thereof… to increase its weight and price.” “The practice of ‘plumping’ chicken or turkey can increase the sodium content by up to 500 percent,” states the bill, which would take effect January 1, 2014, or upon the expiration of existing vending and concession contracts. “Fresh, natural chicken should have no more than 70 mg of sodium per four ounce serving, whereas plumped chicken can contain up to 400 mg sodium. The average household of four people, because of ‘plumping’ chicken or turkey, spends approximately $127 per year on saltwater.”
Proposed legislation (S.B. 622) in California would impose a 1-cent per fluid ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages to finance a Children’s Health Promotion Fund. Introduced by Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel), the measure would apply to all sugar-sweetened beverage distributors whether their products are bottled or sold as concentrate. Intended to “discourage the excessive consumption of sweetened beverages by increasing the price of these products,” the proposal would also create a fund “allocated for the purposes of statewide childhood obesity prevention activities and programs.” To this end, the Children’s Health Promotion Fund would support, among other things, state- and community-based efforts to reduce consumption of “calorie-dense, nutrient-poor foods” and improve access to “healthy, safe, and affordable foods and beverages.” “This bill will combat the obesity crisis and ensure that our children—and future generations of Californians—are not doomed to a shorter life expectancy and can instead live longer, healthier lives,” Monning was quoted…
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) will host a meeting on March 20, 2013, in Brussels to discuss the agency’s work in the area of endocrine active substances (EAS) and endocrine disruptors (ED). The EFSA Scientific Committee will present its opinion on “Hazard assessment of endocrine disruptors: scientific criteria for identification of endocrine disruptors and appropriateness of existing testing methods for assessing effects mediated by these substances on human health and the environment,” which was created in response to the European Commission’s September 2012 mandate to define scientific criteria for identifying ED and to review whether existing toxicity methods are appropriate to identify and characterize potential endocrine activity (effect on endocrine system) and/or endocrine disruption (leading to an adverse effect) in humans and the ecosystem.
