Two California residents who recently sued Trader Joe’s for allegedly misbranding certain foods by using “organic evaporated cane juice” on its product labels have filed a putative nationwide class action against a yogurt company with similar allegations. Gitson v. Clover Stornetta Farms, Inc., No. 13-1517 (N.D. Cal., filed April 4, 2013). Details about the Trader Joe’s lawsuit appear in Issue 477 of this Update. The named plaintiffs contend that the defendant markets some 14 different flavors of its yogurt products, all of which list “organic evaporated cane juice” as an ingredient on their labels “in violation of a number of labeling regulations.” They cite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance, warning letters and an open letter to demonstrate that use of this term for a yogurt sweetener is “illegal.” The plaintiffs also target the company’s websites for their alleged used of “illegal claims.” According to the complaint, they relied on…
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
A federal court in California has dismissed consumer-fraud putative-class claims filed in a first amended complaint against the Ghirardelli Chocolate Co., alleging violations pertaining to white chocolate products that the named plaintiff did not purchase. Miller v. Ghirardelli Chocolate Co., No. 12-4936 (N.D. Cal., order entered April 5, 2013). Details about a similar order entered as to the original complaint appear in Issue 465 of this Update. While the court disagreed with the defendant that the products were dissimilar because its label description—“Ghirardelli® Chocolate”—is like a Dunkin’ Donuts logo used on products, such as coffee, that are clearly not donuts, the court found that “an ‘unlawful’ claim based on ‘chocolate’ necessarily reaches back to the FDA definition. Identity labeling of food requires—under the plain language of the regulation that the statement of identity of the commodity on the principal display panel of a food in package form be ‘the name…
A Connecticut-based law firm has filed Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) lawsuits against three companies that make food extracts and flavorings, alleging that they fail to disclose the presence of 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI), a substance known to California to cause cancer. Leeman v. Adams Extract & Spice Co., LLC, No. 13-529493; Leeman v. McCormick & Co., Inc., No. 13-529494; Leeman v. Farmer Bros. Co., No. 13 529495 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., filed March 13, 2013). Named plaintiff Whitney Leeman claims to hold a doctorate in environmental engineering and seeks “to promote awareness of exposures to toxic chemicals in products sold in California.” She provided 60-day notices of violation to the companies in December 2012 concerning their alleged failure to warn consumers about 4-MEI exposure. The products specifically named in the complaints are Adams’ “Extract Maple Imitation Maple Flavor,” McCormick’s “Culinary Imitation Maple Flavor” and “Culinary Caramel Color,” and Farmer’s “Sierra Brand…
A federal court in California has dismissed in part the first amended complaint in a putative class action against Frito-Lay and PepsiCo, alleging that the companies falsely advertised and labeled their products as “All Natural,” “0 Grams Trans Fat,” “No MSG,” “low sodium,” “healthy,” and with other unspecified health claims. Wilson v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., No. 12-1586 (N.D. Cal., order entered April 1, 2013). Dismissed with prejudice were claims that the companies breached warranties under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. Among the claims that the plaintiffs will be allowed to amend are the allegations against PepsiCo, dismissed due to insufficient pleading; allegations involving products not specifically named or described in the complaint; and a claim for restitution based on unjust enrichment, which should have been pleaded in the alternative. To the extent that the plaintiffs based their unfair, false and deceptive advertising claims…
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires federal agencies to issue a determination about what will be produced to or withheld from a FOIA requester within statutory deadlines; a failure to do so is deemed the exhaustion of administrative remedies and allows the requester to bring an action in federal court to compel the production of responsive documents. Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. Fed. Election Comm’n, No. 12-5004 (D.C. Cir., decided April 2, 2013). The Federal Election Commission (FEC) contended that it could simply inform a FOIA requester within the 20-day deadline (or 30 days in “unusual circumstances”) that it would produce non-exempt responsive documents and claim exemptions in the future. According to the court, FEC’s interpretation of the statute would allow an agency to “keep FOIA requests bottled up in limbo for months or years on end.” FEC claimed…
Three California residents have filed a putative class action against food retailer Trader Joe’s in federal court, alleging three different types of misleading labeling claims: using the terms “evaporated cane juice” or “organic evaporated cane juice,” identifying as “natural” or “no added coloring or preservatives” foods that contain added preservatives and artificial colors, and representing non-dairy calcium products as “milk.” Gitson v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 13-1333 (N.D. Cal., filed March 25, 2013). The plaintiffs claim that the company’s “labeling, advertising and marketing as alleged herein are false and misleading and were designed to increase sales of the products at issue. Defendant’s misrepresentations are part of an extensive labeling, advertising and marketing campaign, and a reasonable person would attach importance to Defendant’s misrepresentations in determining whether to purchase the products at issue.” The complaint outlines the applicable Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations that the defendant allegedly violated, noting that…
The Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) and Compassion Over Killing have reportedly filed a complaint in a California federal court against the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Federal Trade Commission claiming that the agencies have failed to regulate animal-welfare labeling on egg cartons. According to ALDF, rulemaking petitions were filed in 2006 and 2007 asking for egg production methods to be fully disclosed on every carton of eggs sold in the United States. The agencies have not only allegedly failed to take action on these requests, they have also apparently failed to take action against “the often-misleading claims and deceptive imagery widely found on egg cartons.” The plaintiffs seek a court order requiring the agencies to adopt rules that would mandate that producers clearly label their egg cartons with egg production methods, including “Eggs from Caged Hens.” See ALDF News Release, March 28, 2013.
Since the federal government filed a 76-count indictment against the owner and managers of Peanut Corp. of America, the source of a nationwide Salmonella outbreak in 2009, the defendants have entered not guilty pleas and been released on bonds ranging from $25,000 to $100,000. United States v. Parnell, No. 13-12 (M.D. Ga., Albany Div., filed February 15, 2013). Additional details about the charges appear in Issue 472 of this Update. The court has also entered orders designating the case as complex and excluding time under the Speedy Trial Act, as well as setting a scheduling conference for April 22, 2013.
POM Wonderful LLC has filed a petition seeking review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals of a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) order requiring two randomized, controlled clinical trials before the company can make a claim that its pomegranate juice products treat, prevent or reduce the risk of heart disease, prostate cancer or erectile dysfunction. POM Wonderful LLC v. FTC, No. 13-1060 (D.C. Cir., filed March 8, 2013). In its January ruling, FTC found that the company made false and misleading claims by advertising its products with health-benefit assertions that POM contended were backed by medical research. Additional information about the FTC rulings in the case appears in issues 441 and 467 of this Update.
Beekeepers, environmentalists and advocacy organizations have filed an action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), claiming that the agency has failed to take any regulatory action on pesticide products containing the active ingredients clothianidin and thiamethoxam in violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Administrative Procedure Act. Ellis v. EPA, No. 13-1266 (N.D. Cal., filed March 21, 2013). According to the complaint, “In a vast and extremely risky experiment, EPA has allowed over two million pounds of clothianidin and thiamethoxam to be used annually on more than 100 million acres and on dozens of different plant corps without adhering to existing procedural frameworks and with no adequate risk assessments in place.” The plaintiffs allege that this inaction has “been a major factor in excessive honey bee mortality and the decline of pollinator populations in the same…
