A federal court in Georgia has determined that it has personal jurisdiction over a Michigan food-packaging company that was sued as a third party defendant in litigation over a recalled baby food product. IPN USA Corp. v. Nurture, Inc., No. 11-501 (N.D. Ga., decided December 12, 2011). A Food and Drug Administration investigation apparently concluded that the third-party defendant (Liquid) had violated agency regulations on the manufacture of acidified and acid food products. While the baby food manufacturer (Nurture) allegedly sustained millions in damages in the recall, it was the packaging supplier (IPN) that brought the lawsuit against Nurture for breach of contract. According to the court, Liquid had sufficient contacts with Georgia for the court to exercise jurisdiction over the company. For purposes of packaging Nurture’s baby food, Liquid had purchased a machine, packaging supplies and other equipment from IPN’s Georgia-based entity, which referred a “significant number” of prospective customers…
Category Archives Legislation, Regulations and Standards
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has reopened the comment period until January 17, 2012, on a proposed rule that would amend and republish the Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act’s “list of selected agents and toxins that have the potential to pose a severe threat to animal or plant health, or to animal or plant products.” Details of the proposed rule were covered in Issue 412 of this Update. See Federal Register, December 15, 2011.
The Office of Inspector General (IG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has issued a report that “identified significant weaknesses in FDA’s [the Food and Drug Administration’s] oversight” of its contracts for state inspections of food facilities. In recent years, FDA has increasingly shifted to the states its responsibility for conducting inspections, and has apparently “failed to ensure [in eight states] that the required number of inspections was completed,” “did not ensure that all State inspections were properly classified and that all violations were remedied,” and “failed to complete the required number of audits for one-third of the States and did not always follow up on systemic problems identified.” Based on an analysis of FDA inspection data and interviews with agency officials, the report, titled “Vulnerabilities in FDA’s Oversight of State Food Facility Inspections,” opens by noting that annually “128,000 Americans are hospitalized and 3,000 die after…
Eight U.S. Senators have urged the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to “publicly and vigorously” defend the safety of Gulf seafood in the wake of last year’s oil spill. Led by Senator David Vitter (R-La.), the lawmakers signed a December 1, 2011, letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg asserting that although “rigorous testing” has revealed that Gulf seafood is safe for human consumption, many consumers believe otherwise because of “misinformation and unscientific claims.” Vitter wrote a similar letter to Hamburg in November. The effort was prompted by opposing claims made by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), whose scientists assert that FDA’s safety thresholds for Gulf seafood “significantly” underestimate cancer risks from seafood contaminants. NRDC published a study in Environmental Health Perspectives concluding that “FDA risk assessment methods should be updated to better reflect current risk assessment practices and to protect vulnerable populations such as pregnant women and children.”
Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) has introduced a package of bills that would require foods with genetically engineered (GE) ingredients to provide that information on product labels (H.R. 3553); affect how GE pharmaceutical and industrial crops are grown, while establishing a tracking system from cultivation to disposal (H.R. 3554); and protect farmers and ranchers from economic harm purportedly caused by GE seeds, plants or animals (H.R. 3555). Introduced on December 2, 2011, the bills were referred to a number of committees; the co-sponsors are mainly Democrats, although Republican Representative Don Young (Alaska) signed onto the “Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act.” In a December 9 statement, Kucinich referred to examples of cross-contamination, stating “We must take steps to prevent genetically engineered organisms from being grown in a way that could do irreversible damage to our food supply. Under pressure from profit-minded industry, we have already allowed the spread of genetically…
During a recent discussion about family and childhood nutrition sponsored by the Brussels-based think-tank Friends of Europe, the World Health Organization’s representative to the European Union reportedly called for imposing steep taxes on salty and sugary foods to address excessive eating. Roberto Bertollini apparently claimed that the campaign against tobacco, including high taxes and government regulation of tobacco use and advertising, provides a model to address increasing rates of obesity. He also called for restrictions on junk-food advertising and government efforts to promote healthy eating habits and exercise. Others participating in the forum reportedly suggested that parents and schools play a role in getting children to adopt healthier lifestyles. See EurActiv, December 6, 2011.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require the disclosure of food color additives on front-of-package labeling. Citing “the ubiquity of food colorings” in the American diet, the petition claims that consumers are misled when colorings are used to either mask less-nutritious ingredients or make a product “appear to be of higher quality or nutritional value than it actually is.” The group also points to studies suggesting a link between certain food additives and behavioral effects in children. CSPI urges FDA to “amend the labeling requirements set forth at 21 C.F.R. § 101.22” to require foods containing such additives to state “Artificially Colored” “on the product display package next to the product name in bold letters not less than half the height and weight of the name of the food.” According to CSPI, FDA already possesses the statutory authority and…
A federal court has approved an agreement between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) resolving NRDC’s complaint that the agency unreasonably delayed issuing a final decision on its petition seeking a regulation that would prohibit the use of bisphenol A (BPA) in food packaging. NRDC v. HHS, No. 11-5801 (S.D.N.Y., consent judgment filed December 7, 2011). Under the agreement, FDA will issue its final decision on or before March 31, 2012. Noting that its petition was filed three years ago, an NRDC spokesperson said, “While we are glad FDA is finally going to make a decision [on] BPA in food packaging and this is a major step forward in the legal process, it is discouraging that FDA has not responded and that we had to ask the court to intervene just to get FDA to do its job. The agency has been dragging…
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has issued a proposed rule to “expand the circumstances under which FSIS will generically approve the labels of meat and poultry products.” Under the proposal, which would also combine regulations into a new CFR part, FSIS would reportedly allow establishments “to label a broader range of products without first submitting the label to FSIS for approval.” As the agency explained in a December 5, 2011, press release, “all mandatory label features would still need to comply with FSIS regulations.” In particular, FSIS noted that the current generic label regulations are too restrictive in practice, compelling the agency to pre-approve “a significant amount of labeling” instead of dedicating resources to other consumer protection and food safety activities. “For example, the label for a nonstandardized product, such as pepperoni pizza (bearing no special statements or claims) that was sketch approved…
The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) has written a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supporting a legal petition that demands required labeling of all genetically engineered (GE) food. Information about the October 4, 2011, petition filed by the Center for Food Safety appear in Issue 412 of this Update. Representing nearly 300 nonprofit consumer organizations concerned with food safety, agricultural biotechnology, food and agricultural policy, and nutrition, CFA claims that current FDA regulations fail to provide consumers with information about GE food despite growing public interest in food content. “Genetically engineered foods are required to be labeled in the 15 European Union nations, Russia, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, and many other countries around the world,” the November 23 letter states. “U.S. consumers should be provided the same basic information about GE foods as consumers in these other countries.”
