A Texas federal court has dismissed multidistrict litigation (MDL) alleging that Whole Foods Market Inc. lists incorrect amounts of sugar on its yogurt labels, concluding the Consumer Reports data relied on by the plaintiffs did not meet federal standards. In re Whole Foods Mkt. Inc. Greek Yogurt Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2588 (W.D. Tex., Austin Div., order entered February 16, 2016). The consumers claimed Whole Foods’ store-brand yogurt contains 11.4 grams of sugar per serving, while the listed sugar content is 2 grams. Details about some of the 11 consolidated lawsuits appear in Issues 533 and 534 of this Update. Whole Foods argued that the consumers’ claims were preempted by the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) because the scientific testing techniques used by Consumer Reports failed to comply with the testing methodology determined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The court agreed, noting that…
Category Archives Litigation
A California federal court has dismissed portions of a lawsuit alleging that B&G Foods mislabeled its taco shells as containing “0g Trans Fat” despite the product’s use of partially hydrogenated oil as an ingredient. Walker v. B&G Foods, No. 15-3772 (N.D. Cal., order entered February 8, 2016). Five of the plaintiff’s seven claims involved alleged mislabeling of the taco shells as free of trans fat; the court disposed of the claims, finding that the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act required the trans fat level be listed as 0 grams if the content is less than one-half of a gram, thus preempting the claims. The court then turned to the non-labeling claims, through which the plaintiff argued the taco shells were unsafe for consumption based on the trans fat content and thus amounted to a breach of an implied warranty of merchantability and a violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law. Citing…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Kellogg Co. alleging the company produces Mother’s Cookies® with partially hydrogenated oil (PHO), which contains trans fat, in violation of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) ban on the ingredient. Hawkins v. Kellogg Co., No. 16-0147 (S.D. Cal., filed January 21, 2016). The plaintiff asserts FDA “determined that PHO is unsafe for use in food” in 2015, and alleges as a result that Kellogg is prohibited from using the food additive in its cookies. “Today there is no question about the scientific consensus on trans fat,” the complaint argues, in describing several studies examining the alleged human health effects of PHO consumption. For alleged violations of California consumer-protection statutes, nuisance and breach of implied warranty, the plaintiff seeks class certification, restitution, an injunction, a corrective advertising campaign and attorney’s fees. Issue 594
The Association of National Advertisers, Inc. (ANA) has filed an amicus brief in a case challenging San Francisco’s health code provisions requiring advertisements on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) notifying the public of alleged health risks associated with SSB consumption. Am. Beverage Ass’n v. City of San Francisco, No. 15-3415 (N.D. Cal., amicus brief filed January 22, 2016). The brief focuses on First Amendment arguments against requiring private parties to include government speech on their product labels. “The City of San Francisco’s imposition of the Warning Mandate in reaction to potential over-consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by its citizens, whatever the merits of that concern, takes regulatory Nannyism to new levels and is wholly incompatible with First Amendment protections afforded to commercial speech,” the brief argues. “If this Court were to uphold the Board of Supervisors’ conscription of sugar-sweetened beverage ads to convey government views on health issues there would be virtually no limit to…
A Delaware cheese company and two individual defendants have pled guilty to a misdemeanor violation of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for distributing adulterated ricotta, queso fresco and fresh cheese curds in several neighboring states. U.S. v. Roos Foods, Inc., No. 16-0013 (D. Del., information filed January 22, 2016). Roos’ cheese was connected to a 2014 outbreak of Listeria that caused five adults and three newborns to contract listeriosis. The criminal information alleged the company produced the cheese in unsanitary conditions, including the “[f]ailure to clean food-contact surfaces as frequently as necessary to protect against contamination of food” and “failure to store raw materials or ingredients in a manner that protects against contamination.” In their agreement with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the defendants agreed to an injunction preventing them from processing or distributing food products until they undergo an FDA inspection and facility testing by…
Viacom International Inc. has filed a lawsuit against IJR Capital Investments alleging that a restaurant owned by the company infringes on Viacom’s intellectual property in the “SpongeBob SquarePants” franchise. Viacom Int’l Inc. v. IJR Capital Invs., No. 16-0257 (S.D. Tex., Houston Div., filed January 29, 2016). As the complaint explains, “The ‘Krusty Krab’ is owned by Eugene H. Krabs, a prominent and recurring character in the SpongeBob universe. SpongeBob SquarePants works at the ‘Krusty Krab’ as a fry cook, but he also performs a myriad of other duties, and once stated that his official title is ‘Vice Assistant General Manager in charge of certain things.’” IJR operates The Krusty Krab in Texas and has filed for trademark registration. Viacom argues that IJR is “attempting to trade off of the goodwill and reputation of the ‘SpongeBob SquarePants’ media franchise’ and that consumers are likely to be confused by IJR’s use of “Krusty…
A New York consumer has filed a putative class action against Victoria Fine Foods alleging the company falsely advertises its vodka sauce as “all natural” and free of preservatives despite containing citric acid. Shmidt v. Victoria Fine Foods, No. 16-0230 (E.D.N.Y., filed January 15, 2016). The complaint asserts that Victoria “sought to capitalize on consumers’ preference for natural products and the association between such products and a wholesome way of life.” The plaintiff argues that the primary jurisdiction doctrine does not apply because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “has repeatedly declined to adopt formal rule-making that would define the word ‘natural,” although she asserts that FDA “has loosely defined the term ‘natural’ as a product that ‘does not contain added color, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.’” The complaint also cites the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Standards and Labeling Policy Book, “which states that the term ‘natural’ may…
Bacardi Ltd. has reportedly filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking information on the renewal of a trademark registration for “Havana Club” granted to Empresa Cubana Exportadora de Alimentos y Productos Varios (“Cubaexport”), a Cuban government-owned entity. Cubaexport had filed for a renewal in 2006, but the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) refused to grant the license required to renew the trademark. Cubaexport sold its rum recipe and the rights to “Havana Club” to Bacardi in 1994, 30 years after the United States prohibited the import of Cuban goods. Bacardi sold rum under the “Havana Club” name while disputing the rights to the mark with Pernod Ricard, which owns the rights to sell Havana Club worldwide. In January 2016, Cubaexport sought to renew its trademark in “Havana Club,” arguing that it had obtained the necessary license from OFAC, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office…
A Shanghai court has reportedly fined three Chinese technology companies for their part in spreading rumors that KFC fare is produced with “mutant chickens” with eight legs and six wings. KFC filed a lawsuit in June 2015 seeking damages for economic losses and damage to its reputation. The court reportedly ordered the companies to make an official apology and pay a total of $91,191 (600,000 yuan) to KFC. Additional details about the lawsuit appear in Issue 567 of this Update. See Reuters, February 2, 2016. Issue 593
A California federal court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. (PETA) alleging Whole Foods Market Inc. falsely advertises its meat as ethically slaughtered. PETA v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 15-4301 (N.D. Cal., order entered January 29, 2016). The organization challenged Whole Foods’ five-step Global Animal Partnership rating as misleading consumers because the assessments are allegedly insufficient. Details on PETA’s complaint appear in Issue 579 of this Update. The court first found that PETA had standing to sue despite the organization’s not being a customer of Whole Foods. The court then turned to Whole Foods’ argument that PETA failed to plead its fraud allegations with the specificity required. The photos included with the complaint were insufficient to fulfill the requirement, the court found, because PETA did not clarify which aspects of the in-store displays were at issue. That vagueness also prevented the court…
