The Center for Food Safety, Center for Environmental Health and Beyond Pesticides have filed a lawsuit against the leaders of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service and National Organic Program (NOP) arguing that USDA failed to allow public comments on a contaminated compost rule before issuing a guidance document on the subject. Ctr. for Envtl. Health v. Vilsack, No. 15-1690 (N.D. Cal., filed April 14, 2015). The 2011 guidance at issue allows organic producers to use compost materials treated with pesticides. According to the complaint, “NOP regulations expressly prohibit fertilizers and compost from containing any synthetic substances not included on the National List” of approved exceptions, but the Contaminated Compost decision “contravened that legal requirement, purporting to establish that organic producers may in fact use these contaminated plant and animal materials in compost under certain circumstances.” The decision was never subject to public comment, the plaintiffs argue,…
Category Archives Litigation
Days after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a March 2015 letter warning Kind LLC against using the word “healthy” to describe several of its products, a consumer filed a class action against the company alleging negligent misrepresentation and violations of California consumer protection statutes. Kaufer v. Kind LLC, No. 15-2878 (C.D. Cal., filed April 17, 2015). The FDA Warning Letter listed the packaging of several products that an agency investigation apparently determined violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act because the products’ nutrient contents do not meet federal requirements to be described as “healthy.” The letter also warned Kind against the use of “+” or “plus” as well as “No Trans Fats.” The putative class action complaint cites the FDA letter, arguing that the “healthy,” “+” or “plus” and “no trans fats” claims mislead consumers into believing that they are purchasing a healthful product. The plaintiff…
A consumer has filed a purported class action against Natural & Tasty LLC alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling its Goldbaum Quinoa Crisps® as “All Natural” and free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) despite containing ingredients made from corn and soy because “almost all corn and soy grown in the United States are grown from seeds that have been genetically modified.” Slavinski v. Natural & Tasty LLC, No. 15-80451 (S.D. Fla., filed April 7, 2015). The complaint asserts that nearly all U.S. corn and soy are grown from GM seeds, “and as such, almost all corn and corn-based, as well as soy and soy-based ingredients in the United States are in fact unnatural, synthetic, artificial, and genetically modified ingredients.” The plaintiff points to several ingredients in the quinoa product as unnatural, including maltodextrin, whole grain corn flour, corn starch, and vegetable oil. While similar lawsuits have cited the reasonable…
A consumer has filed a putative class action in Louisiana federal court against several California wineries alleging that their products contain “dangerously high” levels of arsenic, echoing a similar lawsuit filed in California in March 2015. Crespo-Bithorn v. The Wine Grp. Inc., No. 15-1424 (M.D. La., filed April 20, 2015). The complaint alleges that the wineries “sell and distribute wine to consumers at inorganic arsenic levels significantly higher than what the State of California considers the maximum acceptable limit for safe daily exposure” and asserts that the advertising and marketing of each wine was deceptive because it failed to warn of the arsenic levels. The plaintiff seeks national and state class certification and damages for the Louisiana cause of action of redhibition as well as alleged violations of Louisiana consumer protection statutes and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Details about the March lawsuit appear in Issue 559 of this Update. …
Saeilo Enterprises Inc., and Alphonse Capone Enterprises Inc., have reportedly reached a settlement in a lawsuit alleging trademark and trade dress infringement for a bottle of vodka branded as “Tommy Guns Vodka” and shaped like Saeilo’s Thompson submachine gun. Saeilo Enterprises, Inc. v. Alphonse Capone Enterprises, Inc., No. 13-2306 (N.D. Ill., notification of docket entry filed April 21, 2015). The gun manufacturer alleged in its complaint that the vodka company misappropriated the trade dress and trademark of the Thompson gun with the shape of the bottle and the name, and Saeilo sought an injunction, damages and attorney’s fees. A notice filed with the court indicates that the parties have reached a settlement and will file a stipulation to dismiss, but terms of the settlement were unavailable. Issue 562
A New Jersey federal court has granted Gerber’s motion to compel discovery of medical records in a consumer putative class action alleging that the company misrepresented its probiotic formula as capable of improving infant immune systems. In re Gerber Probiotic Sales Practices Litig., No. 12-835 (D.N.J., order entered April 10, 2015). Gerber requested medical records for the children who ingested the products, but the plaintiffs objected that the “overly broad” request violated their rights of privacy and that the records were subject to physician-patient privilege. The court agreed with Gerber, finding “a legitimate need for medical records as there is no other source that could test the actual effectiveness of the products that claim to produce immune system health. Proof in the form of scientific studies and expert testimony may not be sufficient,” the court said, so “actual facts or the lack thereof may be essential.” Further, the medical records…
The U.S. Supreme Court has heard arguments in a case brought by raisin farmers against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) alleging that a federal program requiring a portion of the yield to be set aside amounted to a taking of their property, thus requiring just compensation. Horne v. USDA, No. 14-275 (U.S., oral arguments heard April 22, 2015). According to news reports, the justices appeared to favor the raisin farmers’ arguments. “You come up with the truck, and you get the shovels, and you take their raisins—probably in the dark of the night,” Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly said. At another point in the proceedings, he called the program’s requirement “a classic, physical taking.” Justice Antonin Scalia reportedly called the program “ridiculous” and compared its structure to communism (“Central planning was thought to work very well in 1937. Russia tried it for a long time.”), and Justice Samuel Alito asked…
A Dutchman has reportedly been sentenced to jail after authorities determined that his companies sold at least 336 metric tons of horsemeat labeled as beef in 2013. Willy Selten will serve 2.5 years for forging invoices, labels and declarations and using forged documents to sell meat. The court judgment apparently determined that Selten “contributed to a negative image for the Dutch meat industry and damaged the sector’s interests” because he sold the horsemeat-beef mixture to foreign firms. During his trial, Selten admitted that he was negligent with his administration, but he argued that he is “not the big horsemeat swindler they’re all looking for.” Since 2013, Selten declared bankruptcy and faces damages claims of €11 million. Details about the sentencing of two U.K. men related to falsifying documents and failing to keep adequate records appear in Issue 560 of this Update. Issue 561
Two consumers have filed a putative class action against Anheuser-Busch in California state court alleging that the company misuses the “Product of U.S.A.” claim on Busch® beer cans because the product is brewed with imported hops. Nixon v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 15-544985 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., filed March 27, 2015). The complaint asserts that Anheuser-Busch charged premium prices for beer made in the United States despite using imported hops, or “a significant portion” of the beer. The plaintiffs allege unfair competition and a violation of California’s “Made in USA” law. They seek to represent a statewide class of purchasers and to receive damages and an injunction. Issue 561
Attorneys in the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have filed a lawsuit against Wholesome Soy Products to permanently enjoin the company, its owner and manager from causing food to become adulterated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) after government agencies allegedly linked the company’s facilities to a 2014 outbreak of Listeria in Michigan and Illinois. United States v. Wholesome Soy Prods., Inc., No. 15-2974 (N.D. Ill., filed April 3, 2015). Wholesome Soy manufactured and sold mung bean and soybean sprouts until November 2014, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and state agencies allegedly traced incidents of Listeria infections observed in five people to the Wholesome Soy facility. An FDA laboratory allegedly found Listeria in 28 samples—including two from mung bean sprouts—taken during a September 2014 inspection of Wholesome Soy’s plant and…
