The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a complaint in a New Jersey federal court against Gerber Products Co., alleging that since 2011 the company has falsely promoted its Good Start Gentle infant formula as a product that can prevent or reduce the risk of a child developing allergies. FTC v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 14-6771 (U.S. Dist. Ct., D.N.J., filed October 29, 2014). The formula is apparently made with partially hydrolyzed whey proteins (PHWPs) that Gerber purportedly claims make the product easier to digest than formula made with intact cow’s milk protein. Product stickers and ads compare the product to breastfeeding as a way to naturally protect a baby from allergies and claim that the formula is the “1st and ONLY” “TO REDUCE THE RISK OF DEVELOPING ALLERGIES.” The company also allegedly claims that the formula “is the first and only infant formula that meets the criteria for…
Tag Archives baby food
A New Jersey federal court has refused to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that Gerber falsely advertises some of its products as providing immune system boosts and as being nearly equal to breast milk. In re Gerber Probiotics Sales Practices Litig., No. 12-835 (D.N.J., order entered October 6, 2014). The plaintiffs alleged that Gerber misleadingly advertised three products—Good Start Protect Infant Formula, Good Start 2 Protect Formula for 9 through 24 months and DHA & Probiotic Cereal—as boosting immunity with an “Immuniprotect” formula that includes trademarked Bifidus BL probiotic bacteria. Gerber challenged the plaintiffs’ fourth amended complaint for lack of standing, arguing that the complaint did not allege that a named plaintiff purchased the infant formula product, but the court found that the basis for the claims was the same in that Gerber advertised each product as “scientifically advanced” and superior through the inclusion of Bifidus BL. The court agreed with Gerber’s…
The Beech-Nut Nutrition Co. has filed a complaint against an organic baby-food maker seeking a declaration that Beech-Nut has not infringed any of Plum PBC’s trademarks and that the trademarks Plum has asserted to the word “JUST” and certain phrases are invalid. Beech-Nut Nutrition Co. v. Plum PBC, No. 14-0791 (N.D.N.Y., filed June 30, 2014). According to the complaint, Plum sent Beech-Nut a cease-and-desist letter in June 2014 shortly after Beech-Nut launched a new line of whole fruit and vegetable foods for babies including the word “just” on product labels and advertised them under a promotional campaign “This is not baby food” and “This is real food for babies.” The letter allegedly demanded that Beech-Nut stop infringing Plum’s “JUST” trademark and using the promotional phrases. Beech-Nut contends that (i) the word “just” is simply descriptive and generic; (ii) Plum does not use the trademark symbol beside the word on its product…
A California federal court has dismissed with prejudice a putative class action alleging that Hain Celestial Group Inc. mislabels its vegetable juice products as “organic” and “raw” one day before a proposed class action was filed against the company in New York federal court alleging similar claims about its baby foods and home care products. Alamilla, et al. v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 13–5595 (N.D. Cal., order entered July 2, 2014); Segedie v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., No. 14–5029 (S.D.N.Y., filed July 3, 2014). The California court dismissed the case based on two articles cited and incorporated into the complaint concluding that “pressurization has ‘little or no effects’ on nutritional and sensory quality aspects of foods,” which contradicted the plaintiffs’ argument that the treatment deprives the juice of nutritional value and that the company’s representations that it does not cook the juice are thus misleading. As a result of…
In light of the large number of baby food products at issue and differing product labels used during the six-year class period in litigation alleging misbranding and deceptive labeling against Gerber Products Co., a federal court in California has determined that the class is not ascertainable, a flaw “fatal” to the plaintiff’s motion for class certification. Bruton v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 12-2412 (N.D. Cal., decided June 23, 2014). Information about an earlier court ruling narrowing the claims in the case appears in Issue 511 of this Update. While the court rejected the company’s reliance on Third Circuit precedent that ruled a class is not ascertainable when purchaser records are unavailable, it did agree with uncontested evidence that consumers would be unable to reliably determine whether they are eligible to join the class. Sixty-nine products were at issue, and 66 of them were “labeled both with and without the challenged labels…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced a final rule setting standards for manufacturers of infant formula. With a compliance date of September 8, 2014, the final rule includes (i) “current good manufacturing practices specifically designed for infant formula, including required testing for the harmful pathogens (disease-causing bacteria) Salmonella and Cronobacter”; (ii) “a requirement that manufacturers demonstrate that the infant formulas they produce support normal physical growth”; and (iii) “a requirement that infant formulas be tested for nutrient content in the final product stage, before entering the market, and at the end of the products’ shelf life.” Although many companies have already adopted these standards on a voluntary basis, the final rule creates federally enforceable requirements for powdered, liquid concentrate and ready-to-feed formulas. “FDA does not approve infant formulas before they can be marketed,” notes the agency in a June 9, 2014, press release. “However, all formulas marketed…
California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has determined that the evidence is insufficient to proceed with the Proposition 65 listing process for genistein, a constituent of soy infant formula. Under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65) regulations, to identify the reproductive toxicity endpoint, “it is considered necessary that the evidence for developmental toxicity has resulted entirely or predominantly from prenatal exposure,” OEHHA states. “That is not the case for genistein.” The National Toxicology Program monograph on soy infant formula apparently found “clear evidence of adverse effects of genistein in studies with gestational, lactational, and post-weaning treatment, but does not conclude that the effects could result entirely or predominantly from prenatal exposure.” See OEHHA News Release, April 16, 2014. As to OEHHA’s consideration of potential amendments to Proposition 65’s clear and reasonable warning regulations, the agency has agreed to extend the public…
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has launched a public consultation on its draft scientific opinion determining “the essential composition of infant and infant follow-on formulae.” Drawing on new evidence as well as dietary intake guidelines for infants and young children, the draft opinion addresses requirements for protein, fat, carbohydrates, micronutrients, and other ingredients found in formula. It also notes that nutrients should be added to formula only “in amounts that serve a nutritional or other benefit.” Among other things, the agency concluded that (i) “cow’s milk, goat’s milk and isolated soy protein are safe and suitable sources of protein for use in infant and infant follow-on formula based on intact protein”; (ii) “formulae containing protein hydrolysates are insufficiently characterized by the declared protein content even if they fulfill regulatory criteria concerning amino acid patterns and contents”; (iii) “infant and follow-on formula should provide indispensable and conditionally indispensable amino acids…
A federal court in California has dismissed with prejudice a number of claims in a putative nationwide class action alleging that Gerber Products Co. misleads consumers and violates state and federal labeling laws by making certain nutrient-content and sugar-related claims on its baby food product labels. Bruton v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 12-2412 (N.D. Cal., order entered January 15, 2014). Among the claims dismissed with prejudice were those relating to (i) products that the named plaintiff had not purchased and had failed, in her second amended complaint, to adequately allege how they are substantially similar to any of the purchased products; (ii) company website statements that the named plaintiff did not view, but that supported some of her claims; and (iii) the theory that Gerber breached a duty to disclose that its products were misbranded under federal and California law. Because the court found that Gerber’s remaining challenges in its motion…
A California court has tentatively determined, following a 10-day bench trial, that the levels of lead in canned or packaged fruit, vegetable and grape drink products, or baby foods, are below the regulatory “safe harbor” exposure level under Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) and therefore that the companies which make them are not required to provide Prop. 65 warnings to consumers. Envtl. Law Found. v. Beech-Nut Corp., No. RG11 597384 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., tentative decision entered July 15, 2013). Because few Prop. 65 cases go to trial, the court was faced with a number of questions of first impression, primary among them application of the “naturally occurring” defense. The parties did not dispute the presence of lead in the products or that it has been identified as a known carcinogen and reproductive toxin under Prop. 65. Beech-Nut Corp., the original defendant, was joined at trial by a number of other…
