A New York City deli has filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking a declaration that it has not infringed the trademark of an Arizona-based restaurant by selling an “Instant Heart Attack Sandwich” and planning to sell a “Triple Bypass Sandwich.” Lebewohl v. Heart Attack Grill LLC, No. 11-3153 (S.D.N.Y., filed May 10, 2011). According to the plaintiff, who owns the 2nd Avenue Deli, the Arizona eatery threatened to sue the deli in a March 29, 2011, letter, claiming that the deli’s use of these terms for its menu items violated the defendant’s Lanham Act rights. The Heart Attack Grill has purportedly registered the trademarks “Heart Attack Grill,” “Triple Bypass Burger” and other “Bypass” marks. The New York deli claims that it has been selling its “Instant Heart Attack Sandwich,” which consists of two large potato pancakes with a choice of deli meats, and accompanied by matzo ball soup, since…
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has filed a complaint for permanent injunction against Tennessee-based companies that process food products and ingredients, such as spices, spice blends, herbs, and sauces, claiming they have repeatedly violated the law by selling adulterated foods. United States v. Am. Mercantile Corp., No. 11-02371 (W.D. Tenn., filed May 11, 2011). According to the complaint, the foods are adulterated because “they have been prepared, packed, and held under insanitary conditions whereby they may have become contaminated with filth.” An array of insects and insect and rodent excreta were allegedly observed on a number of occasions at defendants’ facilities, and repeat visits by inspectors showed that the cited violations had not been corrected. Other problems included spilled food, unsatisfactory cleaning, gaps in the building exterior, and expired products. FDA seeks to permanently enjoin the defendants from “introducing or delivering for introduction into interstate commerce any article of food…
A federal court in California has denied without prejudice the motion of Ferrero U.S.A., Inc. to transfer a consolidated consumer-fraud class action involving its Nutella® spread to a New Jersey district court. In re: Ferrero Litig., No. 11-205 (S.D. Cal., decided May 11, 2011). According to the court, the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice would best be served by allowing the plaintiffs to remain in their chosen jurisdiction. The court noted that similar litigation is pending in New Jersey, but that case was filed after the California lawsuits, “likely giv[ing] the cases in this district priority.” Additional details about the case can be found in Issue 380 of this Update.
A federal court in Vermont has certified a class of 9,000 to 10,000 dairy farmers who allege that Dean Foods Co. and others engaged in anticompetitive conduct and given preliminary approval to a settlement reached in December 2010. Allen v. Dairy Farmers of Am., Inc., No. 09-00230 (D. Vt., order entered May 4, 2011). Under the settlement, Dean Foods does not admit any wrongdoing, but will create a $30 million settlement fund. Its co-defendants have objected to the settlement, but the court determined that they lack standing to oppose preliminary approval of the Dean settlement. The court also noted that they opposed a settlement provision that has been removed. The court denied several motions to intervene and scheduled a final hearing date for July 18, 2011. The plaintiffs alleged conspiracies to monopolize, fix prices and restrain trade. Common questions of law and fact included whether the defendants “conspired to fix,…
A federal jury agreed with POM Wonderful LLC that Welch Foods, Inc. developed intentionally confusing and misleading marketing and labeling for its White Grape Pomegranate juice product to take advantage of the market POM created for pomegranate juice, but determined that POM did not lose sales because of Welch’s conduct. POM Wonderful LLC v. Welch Foods Inc., No. 09-00567 (C.D. Cal., verdict reached September 13, 2010). More details about the case appear in Issue 290 of this Update. POM has reportedly asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to review the verdict, claiming that the lower court’s decision to try the case in two phases led the company to refrain from introducing evidence about lost sales during the first phase, which focused on liability. According to a news source, the company requested before the verdict that the court not instruct the jury to decide whether POM had lost sales, but…
Taco Bell has requested that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals review a district court determination that three insurance companies are not required to provide coverage under commercial liability policies for economic loss allegedly arising from decreased patronage in the wake of a 2006 E. coli outbreak. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Ready Pac Foods, Inc., No. 09-3220 (C.D. Cal., appeal filed May 11, 2011). The district court reportedly issued an order granting a request for certification of the economic loss claim and stayed its adjudication of other unresolved matters to allow Taco Bell to take an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit. According to the lower court, “The lost patronage claim presents a legal issue that is unique and distinct from the other types of loss for which Taco Bell seeks a declaration of coverage . . . such as claims for bodily injury, claims for…
The Department of Justice recently took action against seafood producers in Wisconsin and Alabama for products that were either processed in plants lacking Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans or misbranded. In Wisconsin, a U.S. attorney filed a complaint to seize a variety of breaded seafood products in the possession of Soderholm Wholesale Foods, Inc. and Fellerson, Inc. and sold under the “Seaside” label. United States v. “Seaside” Breaded Cod Fillets, No. 11-277 (W.D. Wis., filed April 18, 2011). According to the complaint, these products are adulterated “in that they have been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby they may have been rendered injurious to health.” Investigations in 2010 allegedly revealed that the companies did not have a written HACCP plan and failed to adopt one after warning. Meanwhile, seafood wholesalers Karen Blyth and David Phelps have reportedly been sentenced in an Alabama federal court to 33…
A divided Delaware Supreme Court has determined that ConAgra’s insurance 0contract is ambiguous and therefore might provide broader coverage, with a lower “retained limit” or deductible, for claims arising out of an alleged Salmonella outbreak involving the company’s peanut butter. ConAgra Foods, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., No. 227, 2010 (Del., decided April 28, 2011). The court reversed a lower court ruling that granted, in part, the insurer’s motion for summary judgment and remanded for consideration of extrinsic evidence about what the parties intended when they agreed to a “lot or batch” endorsement; if that intent cannot be ascertained, the lower court was instructed to interpret the contract in ConAgra’s favor. The court also determined that because ConAgra exceeded the retained limit, the insurer’s duty to defend was triggered on the date the food maker’s liabilities exceeded that limit. The policy at issue included two definitions for “occurrence,” one of which was in…
A federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) court in Georgia has denied ConAgra Foods’ motion for summary judgment in a case involving claims that tainted peanut butter caused a man’s salmonellosis. In re: ConAgra Peanut Butter Prods. Liab. Litig. (Kidd) v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., MDL No. 1845, No. 07-1415 (N.D. Ga., decided May 4, 2011). Bobby Joe Kidd claimed that after he ate Peter Pan® peanut butter he was hospitalized with abdominal pain and nausea. Blood and urine samples taken during his stay apparently tested negative for Salmonella and other infectious agents. ConAgra relied on the negative tests to argue that Kidd would be unable to show that it was more likely than not that contaminated peanut butter caused his illness. The court disagreed, finding sufficient evidence “to allow a reasonable jury to infer that contaminated peanut butter caused his symptoms.” Kidd’s records “indicate that he ate recalled peanut butter and experienced Salmonella-like…
A federal court in Iowa has determined that 31 disabled men who worked at a turkey-processing plant were owed $1.7 million in back wages and liquidated damages by employers who compensated them at a rate of about $.41 per hour for years. Solis v. Hill Country Farms, Inc., No. 09-00162 (S.D. Iowa, Davenport Div., decided April 21, 2011). The recovery will compensate the workers for a three-year period. The two-year statute of limitations was extended for the defendants’ knowing and reckless disregard of federal minimum wage and overtime requirements because the Wage and Hour Division had previously investigated them for the same violations. The employees lived in a bunkhouse provided by the defendants, and their room and board expenses were deducted from their Social Security (SS) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Those expenses, which were increased over time, were also deducted from their pay; their take home of $65…