A group of consumers has filed a putative class action against Abbott Laboratories, Inc. alleging the company misrepresents its Similac Advance® Organic Infant Formulas because several of the ingredients are banned by federal law from use in food labeled “organic.” Marentette v. Abbott Labs., Inc., No. 15-2837 (E.D.N.Y., filed May 15, 2015). The plaintiffs challenge the products’ inclusion of beta carotene, biotin, taurine and lutein, among several other ingredients, and additionally assert that “at least one ingredient in these infant formulas is produced using genetically engineered materials—a practice forbidden in organic foods.” The complaint contends that Abbott knew that consumers would pay more for organic products and willfully misled them. The plaintiffs seek class certification, damages and an injunction for alleged violations of New York and California consumer-protection statutes, unjust enrichment and breach of warranty. Since the complaint was filed, Abbott has begun offering a version of Similac Advance® manufactured…
Category Archives 2nd Circuit
A New York federal court has granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that Hain Celestial’s Earth’s Best® food and body-care products are deceivingly labeled as “organic,” finding that the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) does not preempt the plaintiffs’ claims. Segedie v. Hain Celestial Grp., No. 14-5029 (S.D.N.Y., order entered May 7, 2015). The plaintiffs challenged 69 food products and 20 body-care products labeled “organic,” “natural” or “all natural,” arguing that they contain ingredients inconsistent with the company’s claims. In assessing precedent on preemption, the court found that a federal agency’s approval of a label does not bar any challenge to that label. The court also determined that the plaintiffs’ claims were legally sufficient as to both the “organic” and “natural” challenges. Hain argued that the ingredients in question were subject to an exemption under OFPA because they were nutrient vitamins or…
The food industry groups challenging Vermont’s statute requiring the labeling of food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have filed a notice of appeal one week after a Vermont federal court denied their motion for an injunction to stop the law from taking effect on July 1, 2016. Grocery Mfrs. Ass’n v. Sorrell, No. 14-0117 (D. Vt., notice of appeal filed May 6, 2015). While the motion for a preliminary injunction failed, the court allowed the case to proceed. Additional information about the injunction denial appears in Issue 563 of this Update. Issue 564
A New York federal court has reportedly approved an agreement between Red Bull GmbH and a class of consumers, settling allegations that Red Bull falsely advertised its product as providing more benefit than coffee provides. Careathers v. Red Bull N. Am. Inc., No. 13-0369 (S.D.N.Y., order entered May 1, 2015); Wolf v. Red Bull GmbH, No. 13-8008 (S.D.N.Y., order entered May 1, 2015). The agreement allots $13 million to the 2 million claimants, of whom 60 percent will each receive $4.23 and 40 percent will each receive a four-pack of Red Bull energy drinks. The court cut the fees for plaintiffs’ counsel down to about $3.4 million, or about $1.4 million less than they requested; the attorney’s fees and class award were not linked, and the court apparently indicated that it would have preferred to lower the attorney’s fees amount to increase the total consumer amount to accommodate the large…
A Vermont federal court has denied a preliminary injunction that would have prevented from taking effect the nation’s first state law requiring the labeling of food products manufactured with genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Grocery Mfrs. Ass’n v. Sorrell, No. 14-0117 (D. Vt., order entered April 27, 2015). Several food industry groups challenged the statute’s provisions requiring GMO labeling and preventing foods with GMO ingredients from bearing a “natural” label. The court first examined the industry groups’ claim that the statute violates the dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. It agreed with the groups’ argument that the statute seems to prohibit the use of “natural” in signage and advertising “regardless of where or how those activities take place,” and accordingly refused to dismiss Vermont’s motion to dismiss that aspect of the Commerce Clause claim. The rest of the Commerce Clause claims, based on the argument that the statute would require…
Food Network’s “Barefoot Contessa” and her company have reportedly reached a settlement agreement with Aqua Star (USA) Co. less than one month after the celebrity chef filed a complaint alleging trademark infringement for frozen dinners bearing the phrase “Contessa Chef Inspired.” Barefoot Contessa Pantry LLC v. Aqua Star (USA) Co., No. 15-1092 (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D.N.Y., settlement reached March 12, 2015). Ina Garten and her company, Barefoot Contessa, alleged that Aqua Star and its subsidiary, OFI Imports, manufactured and sold frozen dinners too similar to products made by a former licensee of Garten’s name and likeness. Aqua Star has reportedly agreed to stop selling products with the Barefoot Contessa mark, remove and destroy the products from shelves by early May, and pay an undisclosed amount of money. Additional information about the complaint appears in Issue 556 of this Update. See SeafoodSource.com, March 13, 2015. Issue 559
Whole Oats Enterprises, a partnership of musicians Daryl Hall and John Oates, has filed a lawsuit against Early Bird Foods & Co. alleging that the name of the company’s “Haulin’ Oats” granola product infringes on their trademarks. Whole Oats Enters. v. Early Bird Foods & Co., No. 15-1124 (E.D.N.Y., filed March 4, 2015). The musicians own the registered trademark in “Daryl Hall and John Oates” and assert common law trademark rights to “Hall & Oates,” which the group often calls itself. Early Bird’s “Haulin’ Oats,” a granola product containing rolled oats and maple syrup, is an “obvious” “phonetic play” on the band name, the complaint alleges. The complaint also details a 2014 attempt at the use of “Haulin’ Oats” by a Tennessee company selling oatmeal and food-delivery services. The company assigned its rights to “Haulin’ Oats” to Whole Oats, which then licensed the name back to the company in exchange for royalties.…
A consumer has filed a putative class action in New York federal court against Blue Diamond Growers alleging that the company deceptively labels its Almond Breeze Almond Milk as “All Natural” despite containing potassium citrate, Vitamin A Palmitate, Vitamin D2, and D-Alpha-Tocopherol. Harlam v. Blue Diamond Growers, No. 15-877 (E.D.N.Y., filed February 19, 2015). The plaintiff alleges that 18 varieties of Blue Diamond almond milk contain the ingredients at issue, which she asserts are artificial or synthetic and, as a result, reasonable consumers would not expect to find them in products labeled as natural. “The [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] considers use of the term ‘natural’ on a food label to be truthful and non-misleading when ‘nothing artificial or synthetic . . . has been included in, or has been added to, a food that would not normally be expected to be in the food,’” she argues. Alleging unjust enrichment, breach…
Ina Garten, the chef who hosts Food Network’s “Barefoot Contessa,” and her company have filed a lawsuit against a seafood producer for allegedly infringing the Barefoot Contessa mark with its line of “Contessa Chef Inspired” frozen dinners. Barefoot Contessa Pantry LLC v. Aqua Star (USA) Co., No. 15-1092 (S.D.N.Y., filed February 17, 2015). Barefoot Contessa, the company that owns the trademarked name, agreed in 2012 to license the mark to unrelated entity Contessa Premium, a frozen- dinner manufacturer, on the condition that Garten and the company had strict control over the quality of the dinners produced and marketed under the Barefoot Contessa name. In April 2014, Contessa Premium sold its assets to OFI Imports, Inc. and its parent company, Aqua Star, according to the complaint. The day after the sale, Barefoot Contessa apparently terminated the license and refused to grant OFI a new license, “given OFI’s lack of experience in…
A New York federal court has granted conditional class certification to plaintiffs employed by T.G.I. Friday’s who allege underpayment for side work and lack of payment for overtime work in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Flood v. Carlson Restaurants Inc., No. 14-2740 (S.D.N.Y., filed April 17, 2014). The restaurant employs as many as 42,000 tipped workers throughout the United States who are eligible to join the nationwide class. T.G.I. Friday’s argued that the named plaintiffs were not similar enough to merit class certification, but the court disagreed, finding that the plaintiffs’ “declarations and depositions—which cover eight T.G.I. Friday’s locations in four states—contain common allegations of FLSA violations, including Defendants’ denial of full minimum wage and overtime compensation for tipped workers.” The court dismissed the restaurant’s arguments on the merits of the case, noting that those issues could not be addressed at the class certification stage, and directed…
