A federal court in New York has denied the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant in litigation alleging that it mislabeled its industrially processed olive-pomace oil as “100% Pure Olive Oil.” Ebin v. Kangadis Food Inc. d/b/a The Gourmet Factory, No. 13-2311 (S.D.N.Y., order entered February 25, 2014). Details about the court’s grant of the plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class appear in Issue 507 of this Update. The court rejected, again, the defendant’s argument that its Capatriti olive-pomace oil is, as a matter of law, olive oil. According to the court, “there exists more than sufficient evidence for a trier of fact to determine that Capatriti is not 100% pure olive oil. Capatriti has more trans-fat and fewer antioxidants than virgin olive oil, is tasteless, is made from the seed and skin rather than the flesh of the olive, and undergoes chemical treatment with solvents, rather than a…
Category Archives 2nd Circuit
TreeHouse Foods, Inc. has filed an antitrust and unfair competition lawsuit against Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. and Keurig, Inc., alleging that they have undertaken a series of unlawful practices that have allowed them to dominate the single-serve coffee market, despite the expiration of their “K-Cup” patents in 2012. TreeHouse Foods, Inc. v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc., No. 14-0905 (S.D.N.Y., filed February 11, 2014). Among other matters, the plaintiffs claim that Green Mountain (i) eliminated potential competitors by acquiring them; (ii) systematically tied up vertical distribution channels for competitive cups by entering restrictive exclusive dealing contracts with companies at all levels of the compatible cup distribution system, including machinery sellers, compatible cup component sellers, competitor coffee roasters and coffee brands, and retailers selling compatible cups to end user consumers, businesses and institutions; (iii) filed an unsuccessful patent infringement lawsuit against the plaintiff—the Federal Circuit concluded that “Keurig is attempting to…
A federal court in New York has denied in part and granted in part the motion to dismiss filed by the defendants to consumer-fraud litigation claiming that their Smart Balance® Fat-Free milk products with added omega-3s are misbranded because they contain 1 gram of fat from the omega-3 oil blend ingredient. Koenig v. Boulder Brands, Inc., No. 13-1186 (S.D.N.Y., order entered January 31, 2014). The court determined that the state law-based claims were not preempted by federal food labeling laws, whether the claims involve the application of milk regulations as argued by the plaintiffs or combination product requirements as argued by the defendants. Among other things, the court refused to find the defendants’ “combination products” preemption theory tenable because (i) it was based on FDA compliance policy guides, “which constitute advisory opinions”; (ii) the defendants failed to cite any FDA policy or regulations directly addressing the milk products at issue…
An unopposed motion for preliminary approval of a class-action settlement has been filed in a federal court in New York to resolve the claims of those who allegedly purchased Salmonella-contaminated pet food that was subject to a nationwide recall and purportedly linked to infections in people and animals. Marciano v. Schell & Kampeter, Inc., No. 12-2708 (E.D.N.Y., motion filed January 28, 2014. If approved, the settlement would provide $2 million cash to three subclasses of claimants: those who purchased but never used the recalled products, those who purchased and used the products and “sustained economic damages as a result of injury or death to animals from their consumption of recalled products,“ and those who purchased the products subject to recall and fully used them “with no resultant ill effects.” Under the agreement, the defendants would also continue to use improved quality control procedures for three years. Issue 511
A putative class of workers employed by Benihana Inc. in its New York City-based Haru Restaurants has filed an unopposed motion for preliminary approval of an agreement that would resolve claims that the company did not pay employees all the pay to which they were entitled and did not provide certain employees with valid tip credits. Lin v. Benihana Nat’l Corp., No. 10-1335 (S.D.N.Y., motion filed January 14, 2014). Under the agreement, the company would create a $600,000 settlement fund that would reimburse certain class members the full amount of their spread-of-hours premium and other members 80 percent of purported back pay due to an invalid tip credit. Under New York law, employees who work more than 10 hours during a work day are entitled to an extra hour of pay, referred to as spread-of-hours wages. Attorney’s fees and expenses would also be paid from the fund. Issue 510
A federal court in New York has certified a consumer-fraud class action against Kangadis Food Inc., d/b/a The Gourmet Factory, alleging that the company falsely labels its products as “100% Pure Olive Oil” when they actually contain the industrially processed substance “olive-pomace oil,” “olive-residue oil” or “Pomace.” Ebin v. Kangadis Food Inc. d/b/a The Gourmet Factory, No. 13-2311 (S.D.N.Y., order entered December 11, 2013). The court approved the named plaintiffs as class representatives and indicated that a memorandum stating the reasons for its ruling “will issue in due course.” Additional information about the lawsuit appears in Issue 492 of this Update. On the day the order issued, the court also filed a memorandum explaining its reasons for dismissing certain claims and allowing others to proceed in an order entered in July 2013. The court dismissed for insufficient pleading the plaintiffs’ New York breach of warranty claims, express and implied; breach…
In a summary order, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of employee claims that Starbucks Corp. violated New York law by allowing shift supervisors to share store tip pools with baristas. Barenboim v. Starbucks Corp., No. 10-4912 (2d Cir., decided November 21, 2013). Details about the New York Court of Appeals ruling on which the Second Circuit relied appear in Issue 489 of this Update. The New York court rejected the baristas’ claims that state law barred “any employee with ‘even the slightest degree of supervisory responsibility’ from sharing tips.” Because it was “undisputed that Starbucks’s shift supervisors spend a majority of their time performing the same duties as baristas, and are primarily responsible for serving food and beverages to customers,” the Second Circuit found “no genuine dispute of material fact as to whether § 196-d permits shift supervisors to participate in Starbucks’s tip pools.”…
The grandmother of a 33-year-old who allegedly died from cardiac arrest after ingesting a Red Bull “energy drink” while playing basketball has filed a survival and wrongful death action against the company. Terry v. Red Bull N. Am., Inc., No. 506504/2013 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Kings Cty., filed October 24, 2013). The complaint recites a number of adverse incidents around the world since 2000 allegedly linked to consumption of the product and cites studies indicating that its use can produce symptoms associated with cardiovascular disease. Claiming that the product proximately caused the decedent’s death, the plaintiff alleges strict liability (design defect and failure to warn); negligence (design, manufacture and sale, and failure to warn); fraud; breach of implied warranties; punitive damages for the willful, wanton and malicious production of a beverage with “dangerous levels of caffeine and other stimulants”; and wrongful death. She seeks $5 million for each cause of action…
New York and California residents have filed a putative nationwide class action against Hain Celestial Group, Inc., alleging that its fruit and vegetable juice products, labeled as “Unpasteurized” and “100% Raw” are false and misleading because the products undergo high pressure processing, “which neutralizes the benefits of the live enzymes, probiotics, vitamins, proteins, and nutrients that would otherwise be retained in a raw and unpasteurized juice.” Stark v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 13-7246 (S.D.N.Y., filed October 15, 2013). The plaintiffs claim that they purchased a variety of these juices—“Red Juice,” “Gold Juice,” “Green Juice,” “Yellow Juice,” and “White Juice”—at a price premium, relying on representations that the products were, as labeled, able to deliver the nutritional benefits associated with a raw-food diet. According to the plaintiffs, raw juice products have, at best, a 5-day shelf-life, while the defendants’ products have a 30-day shelf-life, which is possible only with processing…
A multidistrict litigation (MDL) court in New York has granted in part the motion to dismiss filed in a putative class action alleging that Frito-Lay North America and PepsiCo., its parent, mislead consumers by labeling various Tostitos®, SunChips® and Fritos Bean Dip® products as “all natural” when they contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In re Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. All Natural Litig., MDL No. 2413 (E.D.N.Y., order entered August 29, 2013). The court dismissed PepsiCo, Inc. from the litigation without prejudice, finding that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to support its liability. Among other matters, the court refused to dismiss the suit on the basis of (i) the primary jurisdiction doctrine (noting that the issues do not require specialized knowledge to resolve and that “the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] is unlikely to respond in a timely manner to any referral from this Court”), (ii) preemption (finding that FDA’s…
