The company that makes the Muscle Milk® line of nutrition products has agreed to settle putative class claims that it misrepresented the products’ nutritional value. Delacruz v. CytoSport, Inc., No. 11-3532 (N.D. Cal., motion to approve settlement filed March 7, 2013). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 403 of this Update. A court order leaving just one issue in the case—an allegation that labeling claims of “healthy fats” in a Muscle Milk® product could deceive because a reasonable consumer would expect the product to contain unsaturated and not saturated fats—is summarized in Issue 436 of this Update. Under the proposed agreement, the company would pay the equivalent of $5.275 million for awards to the named plaintiff and class members, a cy pres award, injunctive relief, class notice and settlement administration costs, attorney’s fees and expenses, and products in kind. Claimants with proof of purchase would receive up to $30 each;…
Category Archives Litigation
Immediately after a New York court determined that the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene lacked the authority and a rational basis to adopt a prohibition on the sale of sugary beverages in containers larger than 16 ounces, the city filed a notice of appeal, which will reportedly be heard during the first week of June 2013. N.Y. Statewide Coal. of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. NYC Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, No. 653584/12 (N.Y. App. Div., filed March 12, 2013). Declaring the rule invalid, the state’s supreme court—New York’s trial court—enjoined and permanently restrained the city from implementing or enforcing it. The “Portion Cap Rule” was set to take effect on March 12, but New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling, after exploring at length the scope of the Department of Health’s authority as reflected in city charters dating back to the 1600s, found that it…
A scientist who was accused of falsifying data in research on the purported health benefits of red wine has reportedly sued the University of Connecticut, claiming that it wrongfully dismissed him and violated his civil rights in doing so. Das v. Univ. of Conn. Bd. of Trustees, No. 13-6039748 (Conn. Super. Ct., Hartford, filed March 5, 2013). Dipak Das alleges that he was not allowed to introduce exhibits and testimony or to cross-examine witnesses during his five-day dismissal hearing, the culmination of an investigation that apparently found that he had fabricated and falsified data. He also alleges that the university notified 11 scientific journals before the investigative report on which the termination was based had been completed to advise them that he had “committed research misconduct,” and that the university did this “as a means of coercing the plaintiff into settling by harming his reputation and standing in the scientific community.”…
A company that makes and sells a proprietary blend of purported “wellness” herbs as part of its line of gourmet coffee, teas and hot chocolates has sued one of its former independent business owners/operators (IBOs) alleging, among other matters, disparagement, breach of a confidential performance agreement and non-competition clause, and the misappropriation of trade secrets. SereniGy Global, Inc. v. Mendoza, No. 13-08243CA04 (Fla. Cir. Ct., 11th Cir., Dade Cty., filed March 6, 2013). According to the complaint, the company relies on a network of IBOs to market and advertise its products and signed a performance agreement with the defendant to do so in March 2012. By October, the company allegedly “received information that Defendant had been making slanderous, derogatory and disparaging remarks about Plaintiff and its CEO in violation” of the agreement, was “divulging confidential information to a third-party,” and “had been disloyal and involved in moral turpitude by advising…
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in a California state court against California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which in January 2013 proposed listing the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) as a reproductive toxicant under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). ACC v. OEHHA, No. ___ (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., filed March 1, 2013). Further details about OEHHA’s proposed BPA listing appear in Issue 468 of this Update. According to ACC, the agency’s scientific advisory panel, relying on the same document that OEHHA claims supports the listing—the National Toxicology Program’s Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (NTP-CERHR) Monograph on the Potential Human Reproductive and Developmental Effects of Bisphenol A—unanimously concluded in July 2009 that BPA does not satisfy the criteria for listing developmental toxicants under Prop. 65. NTP-CERHR apparently concluded that “the…
According to news sources, a federal jury in Texas has determined that Ralcorp Holdings, which makes bowl-shaped tortilla chips sold as store brands, did not violate trademarks or infringe patents on an allegedly similar product made by Frito-Lay and sold as TOSTITOS SCOOPS!®. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. v. Medallion Foods, Inc., No. 12-00074 (E.D. Tex., decided March 1, 2013). Additional information about the lawsuit can be found in Issue 427 of this Update. Frito-Lay had sought an order requiring that the defendant cease making BOWLZ® and CUPZ® chips and $4.5 million in damages. See Businessweek, March 4, 2013; The Kansas City Star, March 5, 2013.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a challenge to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rules requiring California almonds sold domestically to be treated with heat or chemicals to prevent the spread of Salmonella. Koretoff v. Vilsack, No. 12-5075 (D.C. Cir., decided February 22, 2013). According to the court, the almond producers who mounted the challenge had waived their claims “by failing to raise them during the rulemaking process.” They had contended that the USDA secretary exceeded his authority in requiring the treatment of all almonds “irrespective of whether they are contaminated” and that the secretary failed to determine that the treatment rule was “the only practical means of advancing the interests of the producers.” Finding no error in the lower court’s disposition, the court affirmed its grant of summary judgment for the secretary.
Putative class actions have been filed against the Anheuser-Busch Cos. (AB) in federal courts in California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, alleging that “consumers receive watered down beer containing less alcohol than is stated on the labels of AB’s products.” Giampaoli v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 13-0828 (N.D. Cal., filed February 22, 2013); Wilson v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 13-1122 (D.N.J., filed February 25, 2013); Greenberg v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 13-1016 (E.D. Pa., filed February 25, 2013). Claiming that the company uses a technology enabling it to create precise alcohol levels in its beer products, each plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class of consumers who have purchased AB products such as Budweiser®, Bud Ice®, Bud Light Premium®, Michelob®, Michelob Ultra®, Hurricane High Gravity Lager®, King Cobra®, Busch Ice®, Natural Ice®, Black Crown®, and Bud Light Lime®. Alleging violations of consumer fraud laws and breach of state and federal warranty laws, the plaintiffs…
The Dearborn, Michigan-based attorney who was ordered to remove statements from his Facebook® page opposing a proposed class-action settlement in a case raising allegations that a McDonald’s Corp. franchisee purported to sell halal chicken when some of the products were not prepared according to Islamic law has filed a motion to vacate the order and to extend the period for filing objections or opting-out. Ahmed v. McDonald’s Corp., No. 11-014559 (Mich. Cir. Ct., Wayne Cty., motion filed February 22, 2013). Represented by advocacy group Public Citizen, Majed Moughni claims that the court’s order “was a prior restraint forbidden by the First Amendment.” Additional information about the proposed settlement and Moughni’s criticism of it appear in issues 468 and 471 of this Update. According to the brief accompanying the motion, Moughni, his wife and children have eaten at McDonald’s and are thus members of the class. The brief further contends, “Giving Moughni only…
A U.S. attorney in Illinois has announced charges filed against two companies and five individuals in a five-year investigation of imports that allegedly circumvented $180 million in anti-dumping duties on honey from China and involved purportedly “adulterated” honey containing the antibiotics chloramphenicol and tetracycline. Groeb Farms, Inc., described as the largest industrial honey supplier in the United States, knowingly avoided more than $78.8 million in antidumping duties by buying mislabeled honey imported from China and has agreed to pay a $2 million fine and “to dispose of any illegally-entered Chinese-origin honey in its possession.” It will also institute a corporate compliance program to ensure supply chain integrity and conduct “reasonable inquiries to safeguard against any illegal activity.” Jun Yang, Urbain Tran and Hung Yi Lin were all charged with brokering or transporting illegal Chinese-origin honey in the United States. Yang will plead guilty and has agreed to a fine of $250,000…
