Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts

A consumer has filed a putative class action against Mondelez International Inc., maker of Sour Patch Kids, alleging the company sells 28 pieces of candy in a non-transparent cardboard package capable of holding 50 pieces. Izquierdo v. Mondelez Int’l Inc., No. 16-4697 (S.D.N.Y., filed June 20, 2016). The complaint asserts that Mondelez intentionally sells Sour Patch Watermelon in oversized packages in violation of state and federal law. For allegations of misrepresentation, fraud and unjust enrichment as well as violations of New York consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, damages, restitution, an injunction requiring more accurate packaging and attorney’s fees.   Issue 609

A consumer has filed a putative class action against Herr Foods Inc., maker of potato chips, popcorn and cheese curls products, alleging the company mislabels its foods as preservative-free despite containing citric acid. Hu v. Herr Foods Inc., No. 16-3313 (E.D.N.Y., filed June 20, 2016). The complaint alleges Herr seeks “to capitalize on consumers’ preference for natural products and the association between such products and a wholesome way of life” by labeling the products as free of preservatives, but the products contain citric acid, “a non-natural, chemically processed ingredient and preservative.” For allegations of misrepresentation, breach of warranties and unjust enrichment as well as violations of New York consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, restitution, damages, an injunction and attorney’s fees.   Issue 609

Siding with the owners of the Empire State Building, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has refused to register a logo for “NYC Beer” featuring a drawing of the building. ESRT Empire State Bldg. v. Liang, No. 91204122 (T.T.A.B., order entered June 17, 2016). Claiming ownership of a trademark in a line drawing featuring the building, ESRT Empire State Building filed an opposition to Michael Liang’s application to register a black-and-white image resembling the Empire State Building circled by a black ring and the words “NYC Beer.” TTAB found that the image was likely to dilute ESRT’s mark, finding that Liang’s description in his application of “a building resembling the Empire State Building” belied his argument that the design could be a different building. Accordingly, the board refused to grant the trademark.   Issue 609

A California federal court has invalidated an amended section of the Organic Foods Production Act that allowed organic producers to use compost materials containing synthetic fertilizers, finding the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by failing to subject the amendment to public notice and comment before it took effect. Ctr. for Envtl. Health v. Vilsack, No. 15-1690 (N.D. Cal., order entered June 20, 2016). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 562 of this Update. In 2011, USDA issued guidance on the agency’s position allowing the use of fertilizer and compost containing unapproved synthetic materials in the production of organic food. The plaintiffs, three environmental groups, argued that the guidance was a legislative rulemaking—thus triggering requirements of public notice and comment under the APA—while USDA asserted that it had merely clarified a preexisting rule, not changed it. The court sided with the environmental groups, finding the…

Following the release of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) final guidance finding that “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) should be labeled as “sugar” on food products, Lifeway Foods has filed a motion arguing that the May 2016 rule should not affect the outcome of a consumer’s lawsuit against the company arguing it mislabeled its kefir smoothies. Figy v. Lifeway Foods Inc., No. 13-4828 (N.D. Cal., San Francisco Div., motion filed June 13, 2016). The case is one of many stayed or dismissed without prejudice awaiting FDA guidance after the agency announced it would reconsider the issue in March 2014. In its motion, Lifeway argues that the guidance is “intended to advise” and “does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on the FDA or the public.” “The Guidance has no more bearing on Plaintiff’s claims under California’s consumer protection statutes than it has on his common…

Betty Inc., a Connecticut-based advertising agency, has filed a lawsuit alleging PepsiCo Inc. used its idea for a Super Bowl commercial without payment or attribution. Betty Inc. v. PepsiCo Inc., No. 16-4215 (S.D.N.Y., filed June 7, 2016). The complaint asserts that employees of Betty presented the idea for “All Kinds/Living Jukebox,” a tour through different musical genres and styles of dance representing the “Joy of Pepsi®,” in November 2015, then accepted PepsiCo’s request to refine the idea for a payment of $5,000. Betty argues it refined the idea but told PepsiCo that the $5,000 did not transfer any rights of use or ownership of the advertising concept. PepsiCo did not seek to further produce the concept after the refinement, but “[t]he Super Bowl halftime commercial PepsiCo aired during the 2016 Super Bowl copies, is fundamentally based on, and is derivative of, the ‘All Kinds/Living Jukebox’ advertising storyline Betty presented to…

A California federal court has granted voluntary dismissal to the plaintiff in a putative class action alleging P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc. discriminates against customers with a gluten allergy by adding a surcharge to gluten-free dishes. Phillips v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc., No. 15-0344 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered June 6, 2016). The order granted dismissal to the plaintiff with prejudice but without prejudice as to the putative class, leaving the possibility that another plaintiff may step into the lead plaintiff role. The court also imposed the defendant’s costs on the plaintiff. Details on the complaint appear in Issue 555 of this Update.   Issue 607

A Massachusetts federal court has dismissed a lawsuit alleging ACH Food Companies Inc. mislabeled its Weber® barbecue sauce as “All Natural” despite containing caramel coloring, finding that a $75 rebate rendered the case moot. Demmler v. ACH Food Cos. Inc., No. 15-13556 (D. Mass., order entered June 9, 2016). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 582 of this Update. The court found ACH had tendered full relief to the plaintiff by sending him treble statutory damages. Further, “the $75 check did not represent a settlement offer—ACH sent the check unprompted, and did not impose any preconditions on [the plaintiff] for doing so. This distinction makes all the difference,” the court held. The plaintiff could not pursue damages when he had already been made whole, the court noted, and his “refusal to accept the $75 is immaterial. The question under Article III is whether a live case or controversy exists,…

Following a May 2016 refusal to invalidate a San Francisco regulation requiring warning labels on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), a California court has granted an injunction on enforcement pending appeal. Am. Beverage Ass’n v. City of San Francisco, No. 15-3415 (N.D. Cal., order entered June 7, 2016). Details on the May 2016 decision appear in Issue 605 of this Update, while additional information on the lawsuit appears in Issues 573, 586 and 592. The ordinance, set to take effect July 25, 2016, requires billboards and other public advertisements to include a warning that “[d]rinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay.” The American Beverage Association (ABA) challenged the regulation on First Amendment grounds, but the court denied a preliminary injunction, finding the industry group’s claims unlikely to succeed. “[A]n injunction pending appeal may be appropriate, even if the Court believed its analysis in denying preliminary injunctive relief is…

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to act on the organization’s 2012 citizen petition seeking establishment of a performance standard for controlling Vibrio vulnificus, bacteria responsible for several deaths related to seafood consumption. Ctr. for Sci. in Pub. Interest v. FDA, No. 16-0995 (D.D.C., filed May 25, 2016). CSPI argues that FDA has violated the Administrative Procedure Act by delaying its response to CSPI’s citizen petition urging the agency “to establish a performance standard of nondetectable for V. vulnificus in raw molluscan shellfish” under the Food Safety Modernization Act. “Every year, people are getting sick and some are dying from what is a completely preventable disease,” CSPI Senior Food Safety Attorney David Plunkett said in a May 26, 2016, press release. “For too long the FDA has observed these illnesses and deaths from…

Close