After reviewing a challenge by the maker of Gerber baby foods, the National Advertising Division (NAD) has recommended that Beech-Nut Nutrition discontinue several advertising claims but rejected complaints that Beech-Nut’s ads implied its baby foods are fresh. NAD warned Beech-Nut against use of the term “coldpuree” unless it “conspicuously” explains that foods are cooked after they are pureed cold. It also recommended that Beech-Nut stop making unsupported claims that “glass is the ultimate in sustainability” and that “glass is nature’s safest container.” Beech-Nut challenged NAD’s jurisdiction, arguing that most of the ads are no longer used, but NAD rejected the challenge and noted that the challenged claims continued to appear on Beech-Nut’s website, in a YouTube video and on product packaging. Issue 632
Tag Archives baby food
Citing the need to help curb food loss and waste, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has announced new guidance that encourages food manufacturers and retailers to use the phrase “Best if Used by” on date labeling. Infant formula is the only product currently subject to mandatory date labeling under federal law. Date labeling for other food and beverage products is voluntary, and the variety of “Sell by” and “Use by” phrasing used to describe quality dates has apparently led to the early disposal of products that are still safe to consume. See FSIS News Release, December 14, 2016. Issue 626
Shook Partner Frank Cruz-Alvarez and Associate Ravika Rameshwar have authored an article for the Washington Legal Foundation’s Legal Pulse discussing a New York federal court’s dismissal of a class action centered on infant formula marketed as organic. The complaint alleged that Abbott Laboratories, Inc. represented its Similac® Advance® as organic despite containing ingredients prohibited in organic products by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Cruz-Alvarez and Rameshwar provide an overview of the case and detail the relevant provisions of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, which establishes that a product can be labeled “organic” if a USDA-accredited agency certifies it as such. The court compared the infant formula allegations to a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit case challenging the organic label of milk and reached an analogous conclusion: the state laws supporting the complaint challenged the federal law’s certification determination and were thus preempted. Accordingly, the…
A New York federal court has dismissed a lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories Inc. alleging the company’s Similac® Advance® infant formula is sold as organic but contains ingredients impermissible in organic foods under U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations, finding the claims preempted by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OPFA). Marentette v. Abbott Labs., No. 15-2837 (E.D.N.Y., order entered August 23, 2016). Both parties acknowledged that the infant formula was certified organic by Quality Assurance International, an organization accredited by USDA to certify organics. The court considered and found persuasive an Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision holding that challenges to an accredited certifying agent’s decision were preempted by the OFPA while challenges to the underlying facts were not. Agreeing with the circuit court’s reasoning, the court “finds that such a challenge is preempted because ‘[t]o the extent state law permits outside parties, including consumers, to interfere with or second…
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has filed lawsuits against The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. and The Honest Co., Inc. alleging the companies’ “organic” infant formula products contain multiple substances prohibited for use in organic food by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Organic Consumers Assoc. v. Hain Celestial Grp., Inc., No. 16-2533 (D.C. Super. Ct., filed April 5, 2016); Organic Consumers Assoc. v. Honest Co., Inc., No. SC125655 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed April 6, 2016). The lawsuit against Hain Celestial challenges the label claims of its Earth’s Best products, which the complaint argues are all labeled organic despite none meeting federal organic regulations. “Behind the picturesque red barn of the Earth’s Best logo displayed on each of the Falsely Labeled Products lies a chemical soup of synthetic, toxic, and hazardous ingredients,” the complaint argues. “For example, of the 48 ingredients in Earth’s Best Organic Infant Formula, more than…
An Oregon federal court has dismissed a lawsuit alleging Gerber’s Graduates® Puffs is mislabeled because its packaging displays fruits and vegetables not contained in the product. Henry v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 15-2201 (D. Ore., order entered April 18, 2016). The court first denied the plaintiff’s request to remand the case to state court, then turned to Gerber’s motion to dismiss the claims based on preemption by the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Gerber argued that U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations allow the company to provide visual depictions of the product’s “‛characterizing flavor,’ even if the product does not actually contain any of the depicted fruit, or indeed any fruit at all.” The court agreed, finding that the law is “clear,” even if the “wisdom of the FDA’s regulations on this topic is a different question for a different day.” The court dismissed the case but granted…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued draft guidance proposing an action level of 100 µg/kg for inorganic arsenic in rice cereals for infants. The agency has also released supporting documentation for its proposal as well as a risk assessment that includes (i) “a quantitative estimate of lung and bladder cancer risk from long-term exposure to these products and the predicted impact of various scenarios to reduce the risk,” and (ii) “a qualitative assessment of certain potential non-cancer risks, in certain susceptible life stages.” “We conclude that the 100 µg/kg action level will help protect the public health and is achievable with the use of current good manufacturing practice, but we especially welcome comments and information bearing on the achievability and public health benefits and risks of 100 µg/kg, as compared with other potential action levels (including no action level),” states FDA, which will consider comments submitted by…
Contradicting an advisory jury verdict, a Pennsylvania federal court has allowed Starr Surplus Lines Insurance Co. to void its policy with H.J. Heinz Co. covering damages related to the manufacture and sale of lead-tainted baby cereal. H.J. Heinz Co. v. Starr Surplus Ins. Co., No. 15-0631 (W.D. Penn., order entered February 1, 2016). Surplus sought to rescind the policy, and the jury agreed with its argument that Heinz had made material misrepresentations on its application for product contamination coverage. The jury concluded that the insurance company knew about the misrepresentations and sold the policy anyway, thus losing its grounds for rescinding the policy; the court disagreed, finding “Heinz did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Starr had sufficient knowledge of the misrepresented facts prior to issuing the policy.” Accordingly, the court voided the policy. Additional information about the jury decision appears in Issue 588 of this Update.…
A Pennsylvania jury has found that Starr Surplus Lines Insurance must uphold H.J. Heinz Co.'s $25 million policy covering damages related to baby cereal tainted with lead. H.J. Heinz Co. v. Starr Surplus Lines Ins. Co., No. 15-0631 (W.D. Penn., jury verdict entered December 16, 2015). Heinz sought a declaratory judgment that the insurance provider must cover business-interruption costs after China's food-control agency found lead in the company's high-protein dry baby cereal. Starr argued that Heinz had misrepresented the situation when the company applied for the policy because it failed to disclose previous contamination incidents. The jury concluded that although Starr did prove "that Heinz made a misrepresentation of fact(s) in its insurance application which was material," Starr "waived the right to assert a rescission claim" either because it sold the policy with knowledge of the misrepresentation or because it failed to rescind the policy after learning of the misrepresentation.…
A California federal court has remanded a putative class action against Gerber Products Co. on the labeling of its Gerber® Graduates® Puffs to state court and declined to admit sales data into evidence on hearsay grounds. Gyorke-Takatri v. Nestle USA, Inc., No. 15-3702 (N.D. Cal., order entered November 6, 2015). The plaintiffs allege Gerber misleads consumers with its Graduates® Puffs marketing by implying the products are healthy with “vibrant images of fruits and vegetables on the outside of the Puffs’ packaging.” Gerber argued that the amount in controversy was more than $5 million and thus sufficient to justify federal court jurisdiction. The plaintiffs argued that the court should not consider the total retail sales of Puffs, which Gerber says is well over the $5 million threshold, because the data Gerber used to reach those numbers was gathered from Nielsen, a third party. The court agreed, finding that the third-party data…
