CJ America Inc., maker of Annie Chun’s soup and noodle products, and a plaintiff have reached a settlement in a lawsuit alleging the company misled consumers by selling products with monosodium glutamate (MSG) while labeling the foods with the claims “No MSG Added” or “100 percent all natural ingredients.” Petersen v. CJ America Inc., No. 14-2570 (S.D. Cal., settlement agreement filed October 30, 2015). Under the agreement, CJ America will pay $1.5 million to a settlement fund distributed in $1.50 increments to purchasers of each eligible product, with a limit of 10 claims for class members without proofs of purchase. Any remaining funds will be directed to the Mayo Clinic, Action for Healthy Kids and National Farm to School Network. CJ America will also remove “No MSG Added” from its product packaging for a minimum of three years. Attorneys for the plaintiff seek 25 percent of the settlement fund ($375,000)…
Category Archives 9th Circuit
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected as moot an appeal for reconsideration brought by the Shaka Movement in an effort to reestablish a ban on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) approved by voters in Maui County, Hawaii. Robert Ito Farm v. Cty. Of Maui, No. 15-15641 (9th Cir., order entered October 23, 2015). A federal court invalidated the statute in June 2015, finding that the ban exceeded county authority to impose fines. The unsigned appeals court opinion offered no further discussion beyond that the “motion to dismiss this appeal as moot is granted.” Additional information about the lower court’s ruling appears in Issue 571 of this Update. Issue 583
A California federal court has dismissed without leave to amend several claims in a lawsuit alleging that Whole Foods Market fraudulently and misleadingly labeled its 365 Everyday Value ketchup, oatmeal and chicken broth as containing “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) rather than “sugar.” Pratt v. Whole Food Mkt. Cal., Inc., No. 12-5652 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered September 30, 2015). The plaintiff alleged that because Whole Foods failed to use the most common name for the ingredient—as mandated by U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules—the products were misbranded and “cannot be legally sold, possessed, have no economic value, and are legally worthless.” The court first dismissed strict liability allegations, finding that the plaintiff sought to impose a requirement inconsistent with federal law. Turning to the plausibility of the plaintiff’s allegations, the court found his reliance claims contradictory because one claim required him to know nothing about ECJ while the…
A California federal court has granted Foster Farms’ request for declaratory judgment finding that Lloyd’s of London must cover $14 million in costs related to a Salmonella outbreak linked to Foster Farms’ chicken processing facilities. Foster Poultry Farms Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, No. 14-0446 (E.D. Cal., order entered October 9, 2015). Foster Farms’ policy with the insurer included coverage for “Accidental Contamination,” requiring the company to show (i) “an error in the production of its chicken product” and (ii) that consumption of the product “‘would ‘lead to’ bodily injury.” Lloyd’s challenged Foster Farms’ showing of the latter requirement, arguing the destroyed products were not actually contaminated with Salmonella. The court concluded the company had shown the products were contaminated because at the time the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Safety Inspection Service issued its Notice of Suspension, Foster Farms’ products had tested positive for Salmonella for…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected Stanislaus Food Products Co.’s attempt to revive a lawsuit alleging that several major manufacturers of tin cans conspired to cede the market to a single company, USS-POSCO Industries (UPI). Stanislaus Food Prods. Co. v. USS-POSCO Industries, No. 13-15475 (9th Cir., order entered October 13, 2015). “This appeal, which centers on tin mill products used to package food, teaches that there’s no substitute for concrete evidence,” the decision begins. Stanislaus, a tomato cannery, alleged that UPI, a joint venture of U.S. Steel and POSCO America Steel Corp., conspired with other tin mill producers to allocate the tin can market to UPI and fix the prices of tin mill products. Stanislaus cited the fact that POSCO never entered the western U.S. market as evidence of conspiracy; the court considered the practicality of the allegations and found them lacking. “A scheme like Stanislaus alleges would not…
A California federal court has denied class certification in a lawsuit consolidated from four separate actions alleging that Hain Celestial Seasonings Teas were produced from ingredients sprayed with pesticides and contained pesticide residue, thus allegedly precluding Hain from labeling its teas as “natural.” In re Hain Celestial Seasonings Prods. Consumer Litig., No. 13-1757 (C.D. Cal., order entered September 23, 2015). In its answer to the complaint, Hain argued the plaintiffs conflated the definitions of “natural” and “organic” in their arguments, noting that under the plaintiffs’ standards, even an apple picked directly from a tree would not be “natural” had pesticides been applied during its growth. The court first chastised the plaintiffs for erroneous references and poorly timed supplemental filings. “Despite 18 months passing between the filing of this lawsuit and the filing of the Certification Motion, Plaintiffs effectively left the Court to drink from a fire hose, perhaps filled with…
A California federal court has denied the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by environmental organizations challenging USDA’s issuance of a guidance document about the use of pesticides in compost without first having solicited public comment. Ctr. for Envt’l Health v. Vilsack, No. 15-1690 (N.D. Cal., order entered September 29). The Center for Food Safety (CFS), Center for Environmental Health and Beyond Pesticides challenged USDA’s actions on Administrative Procedures Act (APA) grounds, arguing the agency violated federal procedures by not allowing a formal rulemaking and public comment period about a guidance document permitting the use of compost with pesticides in the production of organic food. The court found that the organizations had sufficiently stated their claim under the APA and had standing to sue. “The agency’s unilateral action to allow compost contaminated with pesticides in organic production was contrary to federal rulemaking requirements as well…
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. (PETA) has filed a lawsuit against Whole Foods Market claiming the grocery chain’s “5-Step® Animal Welfare Rating System” is a “sham” because Whole Foods fails to enforce the program against its chicken, turkey, pork and beef suppliers. PETA v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 15-4301 (N.D. Cal., filed September 21, 2015). The complaint asserts that “the entire audit process for Whole Foods’ animal welfare standards is a sham because it occurs infrequently and violations of the standards do not cause loss of certification. Indeed, a supplier can be out of compliance for multiple years without losing its certification.” Further, the certification standards “barely exceed common industry practices, if at all.” The complaint coincides with an investigative report from PETA that purportedly exposes several program violations at a Pennsylvania pig farm that supplies to Whole Foods. “‘Humane meat’ is a myth that dupes…
A California state court has approved the settlement agreement in a lawsuit brought by the Center for Environmental Health (CEH) alleging that PepsiCo Inc. products contain levels of 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI) that exceed the limits imposed by the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). Ctr. for Envtl. Health v. Pepsi Beverages Co., No. 14711020 (Cal. Super. Ct., order entered September 17, 2015). Under the settlement agreement, PepsiCo will pay $385,000 and must ensure by January 1, 2016, that its soft drinks sold in California contain levels of 4-MEI within the safe harbor limits set by Prop. 65. CEH initially filed a notice of violation with the California Office of the Attorney General in January 2012; details appear in Issue 427 of this Update. Meanwhile, the parties to a proposed class action alleging similar facts have agreed to stay the case until December 14, 2015, pending…
A California woman has filed a putative class action against Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. alleging that, despite advertised claims to the contrary, the company’s restaurants do not serve food free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Gallagher v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., No. 15-3952 (N.D. Cal., filed August 26, 2015). The complaint asserts that although the company advertised in April 2015 that it would remove GMOs from its food, “Chipotle serves meat products that come from animals which feed on GMOs, including corn and soy. Chipotle’s tacos and burritos are also usually served with sour cream and cheese from dairy farms that feed animals with GMOs.” In addition, Chipotle sells soft drinks made with GMO corn syrup, the complaint notes. Colleen Gallagher seeks to represent a California class to obtain damages and an injunction for alleged violations of the state’s consumer protection statutes. Chipotle became the first fast-casual chain to disclose…
