Two horse owners have filed a lawsuit against Archer Daniels MidlandCo. alleging feed produced by its subsidiary, ADM Alliance Nutrition, was contaminated with monensin, a cattle-feed additive poisonous to horses. Berarov v. Archer Daniels Midland Co., No. 16-7355 (N.D. Ill., filed July19, 2016). The plaintiffs argue that ADM knowingly manufactured cattle feed containing monensin in the same facility as its horse feed and supplement production, resulting in cross-contamination between the two. The complaint details the effects of monensin on horses, including equine heart failure and other major organ damage, which the plaintiffs argue can occur with doses as low as 1.38 mg/kg of body weight. In a statement,ADM disputed this toxicity level, arguing that a horse can safely consume 9.5 mg/kg of body mass, according to the complaint. For allegations of negligent misrepresentation, strict product liability, unjust enrichment, breach of warranties and violations of Illinois consumer-protection laws, the plaintiffs seek class…
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
A California federal court has granted certification to a class of consumers alleging that Salov North America Corp., maker of Filippo Berio olive oil, misleads consumers by labeling its oil as “Imported from Italy” even though most of the oil is produced in Tunisia, Greece and Spain. Kumar v. Salov N. Am. Corp., No. 14-2411 (N.D. Cal., order entered July 15, 2016). The court dismissed Salov’s arguments against the plaintiff serving as class representative because of her felony record and her friendship with class counsel, finding that the charge of driving under the influence does not call her honesty and integrity into question and that the plaintiff’s friend is one of several class counsel in the case. Additional details about the case appear in Issues 554 and 590 of this Update, while details on class certification in the plaintiff’s lawsuit against Safeway involving similar allegations appear in Issue 606. …
A Florida federal court has dismissed a putative class action against The Wendy’s Co. alleging the company failed to adequately secure its customers’ financial information but granted the plaintiff leave to amend. Torres v. Wendy’s Co., No. 16-0210 (M.D. Fla., order entered July 15, 2016). The court found that while the plaintiff’s financial information had been fraudulently used to complete two transactions, “other district courts have concluded that mere fraudulent charges on debit or credit cards do not rise to the level of actual identity theft sufficient to establish standing.” Further, because the charges were reimbursed by the plaintiff’s credit union, he had “not alleged any monetary harm stemming from the two fraudulent charges.” The plaintiff also argued that he and the putative class had standing because of the threat of future harm because they must monitor for future identity theft. The court distinguished the facts at issue from a similar…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Jim Beam Brands Co. in a lawsuit alleging the company infringes JL Beverage’s Johnny Love Vodka® trademarked logo, an image of puckered lips. JL Beverage Co. v. Jim Beam Brands Co., No. 13-17382 (9th Cir., order entered July 14, 2016). Details on the complaint appear in Issue 387 of this Update. Bottles of Johnny Love Vodka® feature the name of the brand with a set of puckered lips replacing the “O” in “Love,” which are then colored to represent the flavor of the alcohol. In 2010, Jim Beam Brands redesigned the Pucker® Vodka brand to emphasize a similar set of puckered lips and variety of colors alternated to coordinate with the flavor of the vodka. JL Beverage filed an infringement lawsuit after the company’s customers reported confusion about Pucker’s redesign; the district…
A deaf consumer has filed a lawsuit against Taco Bell Corp. and two franchisees alleging the company discriminated against her by refusing to allow her to order from the drive-through window. Cirrincione v. Taco Bell Corp., No. 33-0001 (D.N.J., filed July 13, 2016). At one location, the plaintiff alleges she wrote her order on a piece of paper and handed it to a Taco Bell employee at the drive-through window, and a manager then “berated Plaintiff for utilizing the drive through and for placing her order at the ‘pick-up’ window” because it “interfered with the desired flow of business.” At another location, the plaintiff asserts she again wrote her order and handed it to an employee, then “the note was slipped back through the drive-through window,” the window was shut and the order was not processed, “and no Taco Bell employee communicated with Plaintiff in any way, leaving Plaintiff humiliated,…
A California federal court has dismissed a claim of negligent misrepresentation in a lawsuit alleging that Safeway Inc. underfilled its tuna cans by 10 to 20 percent, according to testing conducted by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In re Safeway Tuna Cases, No. 15-5078 (N.D. Cal., order entered July 13, 2016). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 584 of this Update. In a motion to dismiss, Safeway challenged the plaintiffs’ claims of unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation. The court dismissed arguments that unjust enrichment is not a cause of action in California, finding that the claim could be construed as a quasi-contract claim. Safeway also argued that the negligent misrepresentation claim was barred by the economic loss rule, which “requires a purchaser to recover in contract for purely economic loss due to disappointed expectations, unless he can demonstrate harm above and beyond a broken contractual promise.” Because…
One day after U.K. citizens voted to leave the European Union, Samuel Adams® brewer Boston Beer Co. filed an application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to register “Brexit” for use on hard cider products. U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 87083390 (filed June 24, 2016). Two other applications for Brexit marks were filed the same day in the categories of dietary supplements and clothing. A Boston Beer Co. spokesperson reportedly declined to detail the company’s plans for its Brexit mark. See The Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2016. Issue 610
A California federal court has granted summary judgment to Pom Wonderful LLC in its trademark lawsuit against Pur Beverages Inc., which sells a pomegranate-flavored beverage under the name “Pur Pom.” Pom Wonderful LLC v. Hubbard, No. 13-6917 (C.D. Cal., order entered June 29, 2016). Pom filed a lawsuit alleging infringement of the “pom” mark, and Pur defended its use by arguing that Pom’s stylized use of the mark—a heart-shaped “O”—prevented Pom from claiming ownership of the non-stylized mark. The court disagreed, finding that the “stylized lettering does not alter the pronunciation or perception of the word; the standard character mark is both aurally and visually indistinguishable from the mark bearing a heart-shaped ‘O.’” Information about the Ninth Circuit decision reversing a lower court’s decision in favor of Pur Beverages appears in Issue 550 of this Update. Issue 610
A California federal court has granted preliminary approval for a settlement agreement in a lawsuit alleging PepsiCo products contain levels of 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI) exceeding the legally permissible amount under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). Sciortino v. PepsiCo Inc., No. 14-0478 (N.D. Cal., order entered June 28, 2016). Under the settlement, PepsiCo has agreed “to require its caramel coloring suppliers to meet certain 4-MeI levels in products shipped for sale in the United States, ensuring the 4-MeI concentration levels will not exceed the level of 100 parts per billion, and to test the covered products pursuant to an agreed protocol.” The court noted that the injunctive relief is the same as the agreement in an action brought by the Center for Environmental Health (CEH) alleging similar facts. “However, the Settlement Agreement will ‘enhance the CEH settlement by: (1) expanding the geographic scope of…
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the legality of three-month prison sentences handed down to former Quality Egg, LLC executives Austin “Jack” DeCoster and his son Peter, former officials of the company deemed responsible for a 2010 Salmonella outbreak traced to its Iowa egg farms. United States v. Quality Egg, LLC, No. 15-1890 (8th Cir., order entered July 6, 2016). Convicted of misdemeanor violations of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the DeCosters argued their sentences were unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause and the Eighth Amendment because incarceration for their offenses is either altogether inappropriate or disproportionate to the crimes. Upon a de novo review of the case, the appeals court confirmed that “the DeCosters are liable for negligently failing to prevent the salmonella outbreak.” Further, the men’s sentences did not violate the Due Process Clause because the sentences were “relatively short” and the “convictions…
