The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted a preliminary injunction that prevented California from enforcing a law adopted after The Humane Society’s video of the mistreatment of downer cattle at a slaughterhouse became public and led to a massive beef recall in 2008. Nat’l Meat Ass’n v. Brown, 09-15483 (9th Cir., decided March 31, 2010). The National Meat Association challenged California’s law, which prohibits slaughterhouses from receiving, processing or selling nonambulatory animals, as preempted by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), and the district court agreed. The state law also prohibits moving a nonambulatory animal without a sling or other sled-like or wheeled conveyance. According to the Ninth Circuit, the federal law, which contains an express preemption provision, prescribes what is to be done with nonambulatory animals to be slaughtered and sold for human consumption; it does not limit states “in their ability to regulate what types of meat may…
Category Archives 9th Circuit
A New York resident has filed a putative class action against Diamond Foods, Inc. in a California federal court alleging that the company labeled its walnuts with false claims that “consumption of the omega-3 fatty acids in walnuts promotes heart health and lowers the risk of coronary heart disease.” Zeisel v. Diamond Foods, Inc., No. 10-1192 (N.D. Cal., filed March 22, 2010). The plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class of consumers who purchased the company’s shelled walnut products since March 19, 2006, and claims that he relied on the product labels to make his purchasing decision. The complaint alleges unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices; false advertising; violation of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act; and unjust enrichment. The plaintiff seeks an order certifying the class, restitution of either the amounts paid to purchase the products or the company’s profits from the transactions, an order enjoining further misleading advertisements, attorney’s…
A New York resident has filed a false-advertising class action in a California federal court against the companies that make certain ice cream products labeled with the statement “0g trans fat.” Carrea v. Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, No. 10-1044 (N.D. Cal., filed March 11, 2010). Seeking to certify a nationwide class of ice cream purchasers, the plaintiff alleges false advertising under the Lanham Act and violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedy Act and the misleading and deceptive advertising provisions of the state Business and Professions Code. The plaintiff seeks a declaration that the defendants have committed the alleged violations, restitution, disgorgement, compensatory and punitive damages, interest, and costs. He also asks the court to order defendants to destroy all misleading and deceptive advertising materials and products. According to the complaint, the plaintiff relied on the alleged misrepresentations to conclude “that the Products were in fact healthy and relied upon…
A federal court in California has denied a request for preliminary injunction to halt the cultivation of genetically engineered (GE) sugar beets while the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) completes its court-ordered environmental impact statement (EIS) for the crop under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Ctr. for Food Safety v. Schafer, No. 08-00484 (N.D. Cal., decided March 16, 2010). Because the court already determined that APHIS improperly deregulated Monsanto’s Roundup Ready® sugar beet seed without preparing an EIS, the judge noted that the plaintiffs have established the initial element for obtaining injunctive relief, that is, a likelihood of succeeding on the merits. The judge also found that they have demonstrated the likelihood of irreparable harm, given evidence that the GE crop is capable of contaminating conventional and organic corps. Still, he refused to issue a preliminary injunction to immediately halt the sale, planting, cultivation, and harvesting…
A federal court in California has dismissed without prejudice some of the claims filed by a food supplier in a dispute over insurance coverage in food-contamination litigation. Nat’l Surety Corp. v. Pacific Int’l Vegetable Mktg., Inc., No. 09-4898 (N.D. Cal., decided March 5, 2010). A fast food restaurant was sued for injuries purportedly linked to foodborne contamination, and it filed a third party complaint against the company that supplied the lettuce which allegedly caused the outbreak. The supplier turned to the lettuce grower’s insurer to defend it under a policy that was supposed to include the supplier as an additional insured pursuant to an agreement between the supplier and grower. The insurer refused to defend the claims, and the supplier sued the agent purportedly responsible for adding the supplier to the insurance policy for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary…
A putative class action has been filed in a Washington state court by plaintiffs claiming that L’il Critters Omega-3 Gummy Fish® are deceptively marketed as products that will “Promote Healthy Brain Function” in children. Aust v. NW Natural Prods., Inc., No. 10-07949 (Wash. Super. Ct., King Cty., filed February 23, 2010). In fall 2009, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) warned the defendant that its claims may violate federal false advertising laws, and the company modified its marketing materials. Additional information about the FTC’s actions on products with omega-3 related claims appears in issue 338 of this Update. Seeking to represent a class of all Washington residents who have purchased the company’s omega-3 gummy fish products, the plaintiffs allege violations of Washington’s consumer protection act, breach of warranties, conversion and unjust enrichment. They seek a class certification order, a declaration that the company’s conduct was unlawful, actual damages, statutory damages including treble…
According to a news source, a putative class action has been filed against E&J Gallo Winery alleging that it falsely labeled and sold its Red Bicyclette® wine as Pinot Noir when the wine was “illegally cut with cheaper Syrah and Merlot grapes.” The action, reportedly filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, follows news that wine makers in France were sentenced for selling the cheaper wine to the company as pinot noir. Additional details about the French scam appear in issue 338 of this Update. Meanwhile, the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) has reportedly been investigating the matter with French authorities and may also take action against U.S. wine importers. The bureau was quoted as saying, “TTB is waiting for an official translation of the court documents and has begun investigations to determine the appropriate course of action to take regarding the American importers of these mislabeled…
A federal court in Washington has reportedly denied a feedlot company’s request to invalidate or delay implementation of the country-of-origin labeling (COOL) regulations adopted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2008. Easterday Ranches, Inc. v. USDA, No. __ (E.D. Wash., decided February 5, 2010). According to news sources, the company argued that the COOL regulations, which do not allow beef imported from Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States to be labeled as a U.S. product, conflicted with U.S. Treasury Department rules, would raise its recordkeeping and operational costs, and deter packers from paying fair prices for Canadian cattle. The Treasury rules apparently provide that beef is deemed a U.S. product if it undergoes “substantial transformation,” e.g., slaughter, within this country. The court refused to postpone USDA’s rules and further declined to order the agency to create an exception to COOL allowing cattle imported from Canada and…
Two California residents have filed a false advertising complaint on behalf of themselves and a nationwide class of consumers against The Quaker Oats Co., alleging that the company falsely labels Chewy Granola Bars® as “0g trans fat” when they actually contain “dangerous amounts of artificial trans fat, a toxic product that causes cancer, diabetes, and heart disease, and is banned in an increasing number of United States and foreign jurisdictions.” Chacanaca v. The Quaker Oats Co., No. 10-502 (N.D. Cal., filed February 3, 2010). Represented by the same counsel and using the same graphics and allegations about natural and trans fats as a complaint filed a few days earlier against Kellogg involving its Nutri-Grain® bars, the plaintiffs allege violations of the Lanham Act, California’s statutory and common laws of unfair competition, and the California False Advertising Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. They seek to enjoin the alleged false marketing and…
Two California residents have filed putative class claims against the Kellogg Co. in a California federal court, alleging that the company misleads consumers by making health claims for its Nutri-Grain® bars and promoting some of its Keebler cookie products as containing 0 grams of trans fat. Higginbotham v. Kellogg Co., No. 10-255 (S.D. Cal., filed February 1, 2010). According to the complaint, which provides detailed information about the differences between natural saturated fats and artificial trans fat, including that the artificial fat “causes cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer,” the trans fat content of Kellogg’s products renders them “dangerous and unfit for human consumption.” The plaintiffs seek to certify a class of “All persons who purchased, on or after January 1, 2000, one or more Kellogg products containing artificial trans fat for their own use rather than resale or distribution.” They allege false advertising under the Lanham Act, violations…
