A federal court in Illinois has denied summary judgment to both parties involved in a trademark dispute over the use of “pizza puffs,” finding that a reasonable jury could rule for either on the question of whether the term is generic. Illinois Tamale Co. v. El-Greg, Inc., No. 16-5387 (N.D. Ill., entered March 29, 2018). Illinois Tamale Co. alleges that El-Greg Inc.’s products infringe trademark and trade dress rights held since 1976. The court also refused Illinois Tamale’s motion for summary judgment on El-Greg’s fair-use defense, finding that a reasonable jury could find in favor of either party on each element of the defense.
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
The maker of Bertolli olive oil has agreed to pay $7 million to settle a class action alleging the company misrepresented the origin and quality of its products. Koller v. Med Foods, Inc., No. 14-2400 (N.D. Cal., motion filed April 3, 2018). Deoleo USA previously removed the contested phrase “Imported from Italy” from the challenged products and has agreed to avoid using similar phrases, including “Made in Italy,” unless the oil is made entirely from olives grown and pressed in Italy. In addition to paying the plaintiff class $7 million, the company will bottle its extra virgin olive oil in dark green bottles to prevent light degradation, shorten the “best by” period and disclose of the date of harvest.
A Massachusetts federal court has dismissed half of the claims in a lawsuit alleging Diageo-Guinness misrepresents where its Guinness Stout beer is brewed. O’Hara v. Diageo-Guinness USA Inc., No. 15-14139 (D. Mass., entered March 27, 2018). The plaintiff alleged that the “Frequently Asked Questions” page of Guinness’ website stated that “All Guinness sold in the UK, Ireland, and North America is brewed in Ireland at the historic St. James’s Gate Brewery in Dublin," while a disclosure on Guinness bottles sold in the United States indicate that the product is “Imported by DIAGEO – Guinness USA, Stamford, CT. Brewed and bottled by Guinness Brewing Company, New Brunswick, Canada. Product of Canada.” The court dismissed three of the six causes of action because the bottling and packaging labels were approved by the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. A misrepresentation claim and two claims for violations of state consumer-protection laws will…
The Second Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action that alleged Abbott Laboratories Inc. falsely represented its Similac Advance Organic Infant Formula as organic, ruling the plaintiffs’ state-law claims are barred by the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Marentette v. Abbott Labs. Inc., No. 17-0062 (2d Cir., entered March 23, 2018). The plaintiffs alleged that Abbott misled consumers because the product contained ingredients not permitted by the OFPA. The appeals court asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to submit an amicus brief addressing (i) whether the certification process requires the certifying agent to review and approve the ingredients of the final product to be labeled organic and (ii) whether products made in accordance with a properly certified plan will necessarily comply with the OFPA. According to the decision, USDA stated that “certifying agents review and approve both the process and the ingredients of the final product…
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging Pabst Brewing Company LLC's Olympia beer labels falsely imply the product is brewed from artesian water in Washington despite being brewed in a facility in Los Angeles. Peacock v. Pabst Brewing Co. LLC, No. 18-0568 (E.D. Cal., filed March 15, 2018). The complaint alleges that although Olympia was originally brewed with artesian water in Washington, Pabst shifted production to California after it acquired the company in 1999. The plaintiff further argues that the beer may be brewed using chlorinated municipal water, that the brewery’s water supply has previously been contaminated with industrial solvents and that two Superfund sites are located within three miles of the brewery. According to the complaint, Olympia's website credits the Washington water for its premium taste. Alleging violations of California consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, injunctive relief, corrective advertising, damages and application of the common fund…
Ruling that the jury instructions were misleading, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has reversed a jury verdict finding for a seafood restaurant in a lawsuit involving allegations of foodborne illness. Rhodes v. Lazy Flamingo 2 Inc., No. 17-11338 (M.D. Fla., entered March 29, 2018). The plaintiffs alleged negligence per se after one ate Lazy Flamingo's oysters, which were contaminated with Vibrio vulnificus and caused an illness requiring five days of hospitalization. A Florida regulation requires foodservice establishments serving raw oysters to display a health-risk warning on menus or table placards; the jury was instructed that it could consider the text of the regulation as well as a Florida foodservice industry bulletin indicating the warning “may be on menus, table placards, or elsewhere in plain view of all customers.” The appeals court found no evidence that the bulletin offered a "reasonable interpretation” of the regulation, reversed the verdict…
A federal court in New York has dismissed with prejudice a shareholder suit against Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., finding the plaintiffs were unable to allege that the company made “demonstrably false” statements about foodborne illness outbreaks linked to its restaurants. Ong v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, No. 16-0141 (S.D.N.Y., entered March 22, 2018). The plaintiffs alleged that Chipotle and three of its executives misled shareholders and the public in 2015 and 2016 statements after outbreaks of norovirus, E. coli and Salmonella were linked to its restaurants. In addition to finding Chipotle’s annual reports contained sufficient disclosures about its processes, the court found that the plaintiffs failed to adequately allege that executives who knew about the outbreaks' connection to Chipotle sold more than $214 million in stock because the stock sales occurred months before the outbreaks were linked to the company.
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging Health-Ade LLC's kombucha contains four to five times the amount of sugar listed on its label. Gonzalez v. Health-Ade LLC, 28-1836 (N.D. Cal., filed March 23, 2018). The complaint alleges that the nutrition panels for nine of Health-Ade's products state they contain from two to four grams of sugar per 8-ounce serving, but the plaintiffs’ testing apparently indicates the beverages contain between 11 and 13 grams per serving. Claiming false and misleading advertising, unjust enrichment, breach of warranties and negligent misrepresentation, the plaintiffs seek certification of nationwide and California classes, injunctive relief, corrective advertising, damages and application of the common fund doctrine.
In-N-Out Burger has reportedly requested a restraining order against a YouTube video creator who allegedly posed as the company's CEO at two of its restaurants. The man allegedly argued with employees, demanded that kitchen employees prepare him food for a “taste test,” and took food out of a customer's hand, threw it on the floor and stepped on it. In a statement, a company executive reportedly said, “We have recently seen an increase of visitors to our stores, who are not customers but instead are intentionally disruptive and who then try to promote themselves through social media.” The lawsuit also petitions the Los Angeles Superior Court to impose a $1,000 fine for each violation of the restraining order and seeks damages of more than $25,000 for fraud, trespass, nuisance and criminal violations.
The Center for Environmental Health, the Center for Food Safety, Cultivate Oregon, and the International Center for Technology Assessment have filed a complaint for declaratory and equitable relief against Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, alleging that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) withdrawal of the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices rule (OLPP) violated both the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Ctr. for Envt’l Health v. Perdue, No. 18-1763 (N.D. Cal., filed March 21, 2018). The complaint alleges that USDA’s first rationale for withdrawal of the OLPP, that it lacked the authority to set standards for livestock production, is “contrary to the plain language of OFPA, which unambiguously requires USDA to promulgate additional standards for the care of livestock based on NOSB (National Organic Standards Board) recommendation." The rationale was not a permissible interpretation of the OFPA's requirements, the complaint asserts, and is arbitrary and capricious.…
