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…
Category Archives Litigation
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…
The High Court of England and Wales has reportedly held DJ Houghton Chicken Catching Services liable for claims brought by six Lithuanian men who allege they were victims of trafficking. The company lost its license after police raids in 2012 found what the Gangmasters Licensing Authority called “the worst UK gangmaster ever.” The men assert that during their employment catching chickens for the company, they were denied sleep and toilet breaks, charged illegal work-finding fees, abused and assaulted, denied minimum wages and provided dirty, overcrowded and unsafe living quarters. The owners of the company argued that a Lithuanian supervisor was at fault for the treatment, but the court reportedly found that the supervisor’s methods were integral to business operations, leaving the company liable for his actions. The attorney representing the Lithuanian men told The Guardian, “This is the first time a British company has been found liable for victims of…
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 Good Food Institute (GFI) has filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to disclose records “related to FDA’s regulatory treatment of the common and usual name ‘soy milk’ or ‘soymilk’ to refer to a liquid food derived from the cooking and processing of whole soybeans with water.” Good Food Inst. v. FDA, No. 16-1052 (D.D.C., filed June 6, 2016). The organization asserts that FDA has been inconsistent in its opinion of “soy milk,” citing two warning letters to soy-milk producers requesting them to use “soy beverage” or “soy drink” instead. “Notwithstanding FDA’s varying positions on the matter, many major brands of soy milk continue to label their products as ‘soy milk’ or ‘soymilk.’ This has resulted in consumer confusion and an uneven competitive landscape,” the complaint argues. GFI submitted Freedom of Information Act requests to FDA in April 2016 and asserts that it…
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…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against The Quaker Oats Co. alleging the company misrepresents its oatmeal products as natural and “eco-friendly” despite containing glyphosate, “a potent herbicide that last year was declared a probable human carcinogen by the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization.” Wheeler v. Quaker Oats Co., No. 16-5776 (N.D. Ill., removed to federal court June 1, 2016). The complaint argues that although “[t]here is nothing unlawful about Quaker Oats’ growing and processing methods,” the company has misled consumers by claiming “that Quaker Oats is something that it is not in order to capitalize on growing consumer demand for healthful, natural products.” The plaintiff asserts that no reasonable consumer would believe that Quaker’s products “contain anything unnatural, or anything other than whole, rolled oats” after seeing Quaker’s packaging and advertising. For allegations of unjust enrichment, breach of warranties and violations of Illinois’ consumer-protection…
