A plaintiff has filed a putative class action alleging Diestel Turkey Ranch falsely markets its turkeys as "thoughtfully raised on sustainable family farms with plenty of fresh air and space to roam." Wetzel v. Diestel Turkey Ranch, No. 20-1213 (D.N.M., filed November 19, 2020). The plaintiff argues that Diestel "sources the overwhelming majority of its turkeys from growers outside of Sonora, California, at typical factory farms [], where turkeys are raised in large, overcrowded metal sheds that lack sufficient space to engage in natural behaviors and are often mired in manure and slaughterhouse waste—i.e., not ranches or ranch-like conditions depicted at the Sonora Ranch." The plaintiff alleges violations of New Mexico's false advertising law. Cargill Inc. faces similar allegations in a complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission by several advocacy groups. "Cargill makes numerous representations that lead consumers to believe the turkeys used in its Products are raised by 'independent family…

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has warned Frito-Lay Inc. about "serious violations of the Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food regulation" because its investigators found potato chips to be misbranded "in that the finished product labels did not declare a major food allergen (milk)" in addition to being "prepared, packed or held under insanitary conditions whereby they may have been rendered injurious to health." The warning applied to Ruffles Cheddar & Sour Cream Potato Chips packaged with labels for the wrong type of chips, the Ruffles Original variety, at one facility. At another facility, the company reportedly failed to implement "allergen preventive control procedures to significantly minimize or prevent allergen cross-contact," which require the company to "verify that all visible evidence of prior seasoning is removed" after producing Lay's Limón Flavored Potato Chips.

Singapore has reportedly approved for sale a lab-grown meat product to be sold as "cultured chicken." The product, created by Eat Just, has been approved for use in chicken nuggets following a safety assessment submitted to the Singapore Food Agency's "novel food" working group. The cultured chicken will reportedly sell for a price comparable to animal-derived chicken nuggets and will be available "soon enough to begin making a reservation" at an unnamed restaurant, according to Eat Just founder Josh Tetrick.

In spring 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) started regulating food importers under the Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP). FSVP requires a food importer to create a due diligence program to review and approve its foreign suppliers and conduct activities to verify that the food is produced in a manner that provides at least the same level of safety as the U.S. requirements. FDA started to fully enforce FSVP by issuing Warning Letters, import alerts and even import refusals for non-compliance. Shook FDA and Food, Beverage and Agribusiness attorneys John F. Johnson III and Elizabeth Fessler will present the webinar “FDA’s Foreign Supplier Verification Program Enforcement: Learned Lessons from FDA’s First Actions,” exploring the lessons that can be learned from these first enforcement actions and providing practical recommendations for what food importers can do to minimize the risk of FDA enforcement. The one-hour webinar, which is sponsored by…

The U.K. Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a complaint against BrewDog Beer for a print ad and an outdoor poster ad that displayed "F--k You CO2. Brewdog Beer Is Now Carbon Negative" with the dashes obscured by a can of beer. ASA found that the poster ad "had been placed in accordance with guidelines on proximity to schools and religious buildings; that the ad had run during school summer holidays and that one local authority (Newcastle City Council) had been asked and considered the ad acceptable for use." However, the board found that the ad "was so likely to offend a general audience that such a reference should not appear in media where it was viewable by such an audience. We therefore concluded that the ad was likely to cause serious and widespread offence and was not appropriate for display in untargeted media." ASA upheld the complaint as it…

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has prevented France from banning the marketing of cannabidiol (CBD) "lawfully produced in another Member State when it is extracted from the Cannabis sativa plant in its entirety and not solely from its fibre and seeds." In its ruling, CJEU found that "CBD cannot be classified as a 'narcotic drug,'" and although France is "not required to demonstrate that the dangerous property of CBD is identical to that of certain narcotic drugs," the country "must assess available scientific data in order to make sure that the real risk to public health alleged does not appear to be based on purely hypothetical considerations. A decision to prohibit the marketing of CBD, which indeed constitutes the most restrictive obstacle to trade in products lawfully manufactured and marketed in other Member States, can be adopted only if that risk appears sufficiently established."

Two consumers allege that Hawaiian Host Candies, "synonymous with Hawaii," are made in Gardena, California.  Toy v. Hawaiian Host Candies of L.A. Inc., No. 20-2191 (C.D. Cal., filed November 17, 2020). "Had Plaintiffs and other consumers known that the Hawaiian Host Products are not made in Hawaii, they would have paid significantly less for them, or would not have purchased them at all," the complaint alleges. The plaintiffs assert that the candy packaging intentionally misleads consumers with the candy name as well as statements such as "Hawai'i's Gift to the World," "Hawaiian Host products are made with aloha" and "Our classic confections reflect our deep connection to Hawai'i and are meant to be shared with others in the true spirit of Aloha." The packaging also includes the name of Hawaiian Host Inc. and a Honolulu address. As further evidence, the complaint cites the company's social media feeds, which share images of…

Two consumers have alleged that Kellogg Co. markets promotions on the packaging of its products that end before the shelf life of the product. Seaman v. Kellogg Co., No. 20-5520 (E.D.N.Y., filed November 13, 2020). The complaint asserts that consumers rely on incentives listed on product packaging when deciding which product to purchase, but because the shelf life of the products extends beyond the expiration of the incentive, the products stay on store shelves longer than the length of the promotion and consumers purchase products relying on offers that they ultimately cannot use. "Where a shopper views a promotion such as described here, they will have no reason to scrutinize the fine print telling them when the promotion expires," the complaint argues. "Reasonable consumers are not so innately distrustful of companies and expect that all aspect of consumable items, including promotions, are functional throughout their shelf-life." The plaintiffs argue that…

Three similar lawsuits were filed against Target Corp., Gerber Products Co. and Mead Johnson & Co. alleging their "transition" formulas intended for 9- to 18-month-old children are misleadingly marketed as reviewed and monitored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to the same extent infant formulas are. Gavilanes v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 20-5558 (E.D.N.Y., filed November 15, 2020); Gordon v. Target Corp., No. 20-9589 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 15, 2020); Palmieri v. Mead Johnson & Co., No. 20-9591 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 15, 2020). The complaints assert that the use of the infant formula nutrition panel on the back of the packaging "gives caregivers the impression that the Product is subject to the same scrutiny and oversight as Infant Formula products," causing buyers to be "less likely to identify the added sugar in the Infant & Toddler Formula Product, in the form of corn syrup solids, absent from the Infant Formula product." The…

A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that Kerry Inc.'s Oregon Chai products contain too much sugar to be labeled "slightly sweet." Brown v. Kerry Inc., No. 20-9730 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 18, 2020). The complaint argues that the product's "most prominent claim, 'Slightly Sweet,' is an unlawful nutrient content claim that makes an 'absolute' or 'low' claim about the amount of sugar it contains." The product contains 11 grams of sugar and lists "organic dried cane sugar syrup" as the second ingredient on the ingredient list, and the complaint argues that the addition of milk or milk substitute as instructed by the packaging would result in a total of 20 grams of sugar per serving. The plaintiff alleges negligent misrepresentation, fraud and unjust enrichment along with violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and New York's consumer-protection statutes.

Close