A federal court in California has entered an order certifying a class in consolidated lawsuits alleging that the company which produces Nutella® falsely advertises its product as healthy and beneficial to children despite making the hazelnut spread with “dangerous levels of fat and sugar.” In re Ferrero Litig., No. 11-205 (S.D. Cal., decided November 15, 2011). The court limited the class to California consumers, agreeing with the defendant that California law could not be applied to the claims of non-California class members who neither saw the advertisements nor purchased the product in the state. Because the defendant is a Delaware corporation that does business from its New Jersey headquarters and the product is made in Canada, the non-California class members would also have been unable to show that their claims arose out of conduct that occurred in California. The court refused to certify an 11-year class, noting that nationwide TV ads for…
Tag Archives California
The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) has issued a statewide recall and quarantine order for raw or unpasteurized milk products implicated in five cases of E. coli O157:H7. According to CDFA, the recall includes raw milk, raw butter, raw cream, raw colostrum, and a raw product called “Qephor” produced by Fresno-based Organic Pastures dairy, which is barred from selling these items “until further notice.” “While laboratory samples of Organic Pastures raw milk have not detected E. coli O157:H7 contamination, epidemiologic data… links [sic] the illnesses with Organic Pastures raw milk,” states a November 15, 2011, CDFA press release explaining that the five known cases apparently involved children whose only common food exposure was unpasteurized milk. The agency has also started “a complete inspection at Organic Pastures dairy—of all facets of operations, from the cows to the bottling plant,” where the quarantine will only be lifted once the facility…
An asset management company has reportedly filed a lawsuit in a California state court against “Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty” (SHAC), an organization apparently dedicated to closing down a life sciences company that tests pharmaceutical, agricultural and veterinary products on animals, alleging that SHAC has targeted its employees for harassment because the company holds shares in a pharmaceutical company that does business with Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS). According to BlackRock’s complaint for injunctive relief, which also named three individuals as defendants, SHAC has held demonstrations at the homes of the money manager’s employees, threatened them and terrified their children. SHAC’s website purportedly displays images of the protests and “names the targeted employees for all the public to see.” The complaint also apparently contends that one of the defendants “has already been permanently enjoined by a California state court from among other things, any act of violence or making any threat of…
A federal court in California has entered an order granting the motion of conventional alfalfa farmers and environmental groups for an award of attorney’s fees and costs in litigation that successfully challenged a U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) decision to de-regulate genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa without conducting an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Geertson Seed Farms v. Johanns, No. 06-01075 (N.D. Cal., decided November 8, 2011). While the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately reversed lower court rulings in the case as to the scope of relief granted, the core determination that APHIS had violated NEPA survived the appeal. Due to the “limited” nature of the plaintiffs’ success, the court imposed a 10-percent reduction on their request and ordered a total award of $1.6 million. The defendant had argued that the plaintiffs were entitled to $829,422 only.
The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued a notice addressing its amendment to “the calculation used to convert estimates of animal cancer potencyto estimates of human cancer potency, which is used to calculate no significant risk levels for carcinogens listed under Proposition 65.” According to the notice, the amendment took effect November 11, 2011, and will change “the existing regulatory provision to a ratio of human to animal bodyweight to the one-fourth power for interspecies conversion and delete[] the provision giving specific scaling factors for mice and rat data.” OEHHA has also announced that its Carcinogen Identification Committee has been asked to consider whether Dibenzanthracenes should be added to the Proposition 65 list. These substances are ubiquitous polyaromatic hydrocarbons that are the product of incomplete combustion, and human exposure may occur from contaminated food or water. Public comments are requested by January 10, 2012.…
Contending that the genetically modified (GM) corn in General Mills’ Kix Crispy Corn Puffs® and Honey Kix Crispy Corn Puffs® cereals renders their “All Natural Corn” representations false and misleading, a California resident has filed a putative class action against the company in state court. Lewis v. General Mills, Inc., No. BC472451 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed October 28, 2011). Citing the Cornucopia Institute’s “Cereal Crimes” report, and testing purportedly showing that Kix contains GM corn, the plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class of consumers who allegedly relied on the “All Natural” representations, as well as other company indicia of wholesomeness, to purchase products at a premium price and were denied the benefit of their bargain. According to the plaintiff, companies that produce GM crops note that that their genetic makeup has been “altered to exhibit traits that are not naturally theirs,” and the World Health Organization…
A California resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Austrian and British companies that sell Oxygizer®, a “designer water” product promoted as an athletic performance aid, alleging that increased oxygen content cannot deliver the benefits claimed. Ghazarian v. Oxy Beverages Handelsgelsellschaft mbH, No. 11-8860 (C.D. Cal., filed October 26, 2011). The companies purportedly promote the product with claims that (i) it aids rapid muscle recovery by increasing the level of oxygen in the body, (ii) the glass bottle eliminates or reduces oxygen loss, (iii) it is the only water with a proven positive effect on the body, (iv) the product is patented, (v) it transports oxygen in body cells to regenerate them, (vi) the water strengthens the immune system and improves cardiovascular and respiratory function, and (vii) it helps office workers who are deprived of oxygen in large cities. According to the plaintiff, each of these claims is…
California residents have filed a putative class action in a federal court against grocery chain Trader Joe’s Co., alleging that a number of its “All Natural” products contain synthetic or artificial ingredients and thus are mislabeled and falsely advertised. Larsen v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 11-5188 (N.D. Cal., filed October 24, 2011). According to the complaint, “The labeling of products as ‘All Natural’ carries implicit health benefits important to consumers—benefits that consumers are often willing to pay a premium for over comparable products that are not ‘All Natural.’ Trader Joe’s has cultivated and reinforced a corporate image that has catered to this ‘All Natural’ theme and has boldly emblazed this claim on each and every one of its foods identified above, despite the fact Trader Joe’s uses synthetic ingredients in the products identified above.” The listed products include cookies, biscuits, cheese, fruit jellies, and apple juice sold under the Trader…
A federal court in California has issued orders allowing certain claims to proceed in Lanham Act litigation brought by sugar producers against trade associations and companies that make high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). W. Sugar Coop. v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., No. 11-3473 (C.D. Cal., orders entered October 21, 2011). The plaintiffs allege that an advertising campaign the defendants launched in 2008 to tell the public that “HFCS is corn sugar,” “HFCS is natural,” and “sugar is sugar” contains false representations about HFCS “that constitute false advertising under the Lanham Act and a violation of the California[] Unfair Business Practices Act.” The defendants filed a motion to dismiss contending that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted. While the court agreed that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim against individual trade association members, it found the pleadings sufficient to state a claim for false advertising…
General Nutrition Centers Inc. and the company that makes 2:1 Protein Bars® have settled class claims filed in California alleging that the companies misbranded four flavors in the product line by “allegedly overstat[ing] their protein content and understat[ing] their sugar and carbohydrate content.” Cagle v. Anti-Aging Essentials, Inc., No. 11-02940 (C.D. Cal., motion for preliminary approval of proposed settlement filed October 17, 2011). While the companies apparently reformulated the bars and labels before the lawsuit was filed, they have agreed to comply with federal labeling laws in the future and to provide three free protein bars to class members who have been identified through online purchase records or their use of customer loyalty cards. Consumers who can prove their purchases with receipts will receive free replacement bars under the proposed settlement, if the court approves it. Consumers without proof of purchase would be able to receive buy-one-get-one free coupons for…
