A plaintiff has filed a putative class action asserting that The Kroger Co.'s ground coffee packaging and labeling mislead consumers as to the amount of cups of coffee they can produce. Lorentzen v. Kroger Co., No. 20-6754 (C.D. Cal., filed July 28, 2020). "The scheme is straightforward," the complaint alleges. "Defendant sells the Products with the representation they contain enough ground coffee to yield a specific number of servings (e.g., 225 cups). This representation is prominently displayed on the front panel of the coffee canister. However, if the back-panel brewing instructions are followed, the canister produces significantly less than what is advertised on the front panel." For example, the plaintiff asserts, one product's labeling indicated it could be used to make "about 225 cups," but the contents would make about 110 cups if the direction of one tablespoon of coffee per six ounces of water is followed. The plaintiff seeks…
Tag Archives coffee
Europol and Interpol have announced the seizure of 320 additional tonnes of "counterfeit and substandard food and beverages" following an operation that involved 83 countries, bringing the operation's seizure total to about 12,000 tonnes. "This year’s operational activities have found a new disturbing trend to address: the infiltration of low-quality products into the supply chain, a development possibly linked to the COVID-19 pandemic," the press release notes. The operation, which focused on dairy foods, olive oil, alcohol and horse meat, also identified counterfeit cereals, grains and derived products as well as coffee, tea and condiments.
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has confirmed that coffee will not be required to carry warnings about risks of cancer or reproductive harm mandated by the state's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Prop. 65). In a June 3, 2019, tweet, the agency stated that its "coffee regulation has been approved," finding that the chemicals "created by and inherent in roasting coffee beans or brewing coffee, do not pose a significant cancer risk." The agency indicates that the regulation will take effect October 1, 2019.
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that L & K Coffee Co. misleads consumers by selling a blend of coffee it labels as "Kona," which allegedly refers to a distinctive geographic region in Hawaii. Faison v. L & K Coffee Co., No. 19-1248 (E.D.N.Y., filed March 3, 2019). The complaint asserts that authentic Kona coffee has identifiable "concentration ratios of strontium-to-zinc and barium-to-nickel," and testing purportedly found different ratios in L & K's Kona coffee. "A reasonable consumer would not expect a product labeled a Kona blend to contain 100% Kona, but would expect an amount significant enough to characterize the overall blend, and that amount is absent from the Products," the plaintiff argues. For allegations of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and violations of New York consumer-protection statutes, he seeks injunctive relief, damages and attorney's fees.
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has determined that coffee will not be required to carry a label indicating that it contains chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm pursuant to the state's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65). According to the notice, "Coffee, a unique and complex chemical mixture made from the roasted seeds of the coffee plant, contains many different compounds, including carcinogens listed under Proposition 65, and anticarcinogens. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)—the only Proposition 65 authoritative body to have evaluated coffee—concluded that coffee consumption is not classifiable as to its overall carcinogenicity and is associated with reduced risk of certain cancers in humans." Written comments on the determination will be accepted until August 30, 2018.
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging New England Coffee Company (NECC) mislabels its Hazelnut Crème Coffee by failing to include a front-label disclosure that the product contains natural and artificial flavors. Dumont v. Reily Foods Co., No. 18-10907 (D. Mass., filed May 7, 2018). "Rather, buried on the back side of the label in the far-left corner in tiny print was the only indication that the Product did not contain its characterizing ingredient [hazelnut]," the complaint asserts. The plaintiff argues that the front-label disclosure is a legal requirement and "a material term on which a reasonable consumer would rely." The complaint points to examples of competitors' hazelnut coffees that contain front-of-package disclosures as well as similar disclosures on other varieties of coffee sold by NECC. The complaint asserts that after the plaintiff sent a notification-and-demand letter to NECC in 2017, the company added the disclosure to 15 of the…
A California federal jury has awarded $710,001 to Grumpy Cat Ltd., which had alleged that a beverage company infringed its copyright and trademarks. Grumpy Cat Ltd. v. Grenade Beverage LLC, No. 15-2063 (C.D. Cal., verdict entered January 23, 2018). The dispute arose after Grumpy Cat licensed its trademark to Grenade Beverage LLC for a line of iced-coffee products; Grumpy Cat filed suit when it learned that Grenade was also using Grumpy Cat’s likeness on coffee products and apparel—which fell outside the scope of the companies' agreement—and had registered the domain name grumpycat.com. The jury awarded Grumpy Cat $1 for breach of contract and $710,000 for copyright and trademark violations. The parties agreed before trial that the court would rule on the cybersquatting and accounting claims as well as Grenade’s counterclaims for declaratory relief for ownership and non-infringement of trademark, copyright and domain name.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has issued a final determination that the country of origin of coffee beans is the country in which the coffee beans are roasted. CBP ruled that “roasting green coffee beans substantially transforms the beans into a new and different article of commerce." The agency issues country-of-origin rulings “for the purpose of granting waivers of certain ‘Buy American’ restrictions in United States law or practice” for government procurement.
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has affirmed a refusal to grant Empire Technology Development a trademark for “coffee flour,” finding “clear evidence of generic use” of the term. In re Empire Tech. Dev. LLC, Serial No. 85876688 (TTAB, entered August 3, 2017). The company, which created the flour from ground coffee cherry skins, pulp and pectin, claimed first use of the mark in 2012. TTAB found that Empire “failed to develop and promulgate a generic term other than ‘coffee flour’ and to educate the public to use some other name” and used coffee flour as a generic term in its advertising materials and in media coverage. To allow trademark protection for a generic term, even when identified with a first user, would grant the owner a monopoly because a competitor could not describe the product as what it is, the board said. Moreover, the board said Empire’s failure…
The Seattle City Council has approved a tax on distributors of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) proposed by the city’s mayor. SSBs covered by the tax include sports, fruit, energy and soft drinks as well as flavored syrups commonly used in coffee drinks. Baby formula, medications, weight-loss drinks, fruit juice and diet soft drinks are exempt from the tax. See Seattle Times, June 5, 2017. Issue 637
