U.S. Representative Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) has reportedly introduced legislation that would require manufacturers to label products containing lean finely textured beef (LFTB) trimmings. Dubbed the “Requiring Easy and Accurate Labeling” or REAL Beef Act, the proposal would mandate such labels “at the final point of sale” to inform consumers that they are purchasing what Pingree described in a March 30, 2012, press release as “pink slime.” Citing an online petition calling for an end to LFTB in school lunches, Pingree argued that consumers “have made it pretty clear they don’t want this stuff in their food. If a product contains connective tissue and beef scraps and has been treated with ammonia, you ought to be able to know that when you pick it up in the grocery store.” Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has apparently agreed to grant manufacturers’ requests to voluntarily label LFTB trimmings in their products.…
Tag Archives labeling
A federal court in California has granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss filed by Quaker Oats in consolidated cases alleging that the company falsely advertises products such as granola bars and instant oatmeal containing small amounts of trans fats as healthy. In re: Quaker Oats Labeling Litig., No. 10-502 (N.D. Cal., decided March 28, 2012). According to the court, the plaintiffs’ “primary contention” is that consuming “any amount of artificial ‘trans fat’ is unhealthy, and that therefore various aspects of the labeling on Quaker’s products” are false and misleading under California law. The court earlier determined that some of the claims were preempted by federal law. Additional information about the litigation appears in Issue 369 of this Update. Regarding the plaintiffs’ expanded pleadings, which complain of “various additional statements and images on Chewy Bars, Instant Oatmeal, and Oatmeal To Go Bars,” the court refused to…
The National Consumers League has written to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, asking the agency to take enforcement action against several companies that label their products as “100%” lemon juice, while they actually contain 35 percent or less lemon juice. According to the March 21, 2012, letter, “The products tested omit requisite amounts of real lemon juice and substitute water, citric acid, and in some cases sugar. The cheating is concealed by labeling the products as ‘100%’ lemon juice or simply ‘Lemon Juice from concentrate,’ and the producers make it appear that the products are of greater value than they really are.” Included with the letter are labels from four different products and lab reports from the company that apparently tested them. The National Consumers League characterizes the juice as “heavily diluted with water beyond what is necessary and appropriate to reconstitute the product.” Its letter also…
A federal court in California has refused to dismiss most of the putative class claims filed by a consumer against a company that made an alcoholic beverage containing high levels of caffeine, finding that a federal alcohol labeling law did not preempt state-law claims based on labeling or advertising and that the allegations of economic injury are sufficient to establish standing under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). Cuevas v. United Brands Co., Inc., No. 11-991 (S.D. Cal., order entered March 8, 2012). The defendant manufactured and sold JOOSE®, a flavored beverage with about 125 mg caffeine and 9.9 to 12 percent alcohol, from 2007 until it voluntarily removed the product from the market in December 2010 after receiving a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The plaintiff allegedly purchased the product on two occasions in April and August 2010 and subsequently filed suit alleging that the defendant violated…
Fifty-five members of Congress have sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of a legal petition demanding the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods. Signed by 10 senators and 45 representatives, the March 12, 2012, letter urges FDA “to protect a consumer’s right to know, the freedom to choose what we feed our families, and the integrity of our free and open markets.” Filed in October 2011 by the nonprofit Center for Food Safety, the petition reportedly has the support of more than 400 health and consumer agencies and has received nearly a million comments in favor of GE labeling, the lawmakers said. They assert that FDA’s 1992 policy statement allowing GE foods to be marketed without labeling is inadequate and outdated because it merely covers foods changed “materially” by taste, smell or other senses. “The use of novel food technologies like genetic engineering on…
The American Heart Association, Center for Science in the Public Interest and Environmental Working Group (EWG) have issued a February 23, 2012, letter to the Food and Drug Administration, requesting that the agency compel food labels to denote “added sugars” separately on ingredient lists. Signed by 11 additional organizations, the letter cites national survey data suggesting “that the usual intake of added sugars for Americans is 22.2 teaspoons per day, which is the equivalent of 355 calories, despite the recommended daily limit that women get only 100 daily calories and men only 150 from added sugars.” It therefore claims that breaking out added sugars “like high fructose corn syrup, sucrose and corn sweetener” on food labels will help consumers better evaluate their purchases. Under the coalition’s proposal, food labels would consider the term “added sugars” “as a single food ingredient with a parenthetical list [by descending weight] of the specific…
A California resident has filed a putative class action in a California federal court against the companies that make a line of SoBe® beverages known as 0 Calories Lifewater®, alleging that the product labels and promotions are misleading. Hairston v. S. Beach Beverage Co., Inc., No. 12-1429 (C.D. Cal., filed February 21, 2012). According to the plaintiff, the companies label the product as “all natural” despite purported non-natural and synthetic ingredients, such as ascorbic acid, cyanocobalamin, calcium pantothenate, niacinamide, and pyridoxine hydrochloride, which are apparently listed on product labels as Vitamins C, B12, B5, B3, and B6, respectively. He claims that reasonable consumers “do not have the specialized knowledge necessary to identify ingredients in SoBe Beverages as being inconsistent with the ‘All Natural’ claims.” The plaintiff also alleges that the companies deceive consumers by using the names of fruits on the labels. For example, the “B-Energy Strawberry Apricot, does not…
The European Commission recently released a new animal welfare strategy designed to close gaps in the current laws and remedy a lack of uniform enforcement. According to a January 20, 2012, press release, the strategy ultimately aims to (i) provide consumers with more information about “what animal-welfare claims made on product labels really mean,” (ii) ensure that existing rules “really do benefit animals,” and (iii) improve training for animal handlers. In addition, the Commission has pledged to address the transportation of animals to slaughter, as well as introduce a general animal welfare bill and bills pertaining specifically to pig welfare over the next four years. The announcement apparently followed a citizen petition covered in Issue 422 of this Update and initiated by World Horse Welfare (WHW), which called for an eight-hour limit on the transportation of livestock to slaughter. Nevertheless, the group has since criticized the new strategy’s failure to…
Putative class actions have been filed in New Jersey and California federal courts against Tropicana Products, Inc., alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling and marketing its orange juice as “100% pure and natural,” when it actually “undergoes extensive processing which includes the addition of aromas and flavors.” Lynch v. Tropicana Prods., Inc., No. 11-07382 (D.N.J., filed December 19, 2011); Lewis v. Tropicana Prods., Inc., No. 12-00049 (E.D. Cal., filed January 6, 2012). Both plaintiffs seek to certify nationwide classes. The New Jersey plaintiff alleges unjust enrichment, breach of express warranty, violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and injunctive and declaratory relief. He requests compensatory, treble and punitive damages; prejudgment interest; restitution; injunctive relief; attorney’s fees; and expenses and costs of suit. The California plaintiff, who also seeks to certify a subclass of California consumers, alleges unjust enrichment; breach of express warranty; violation of the state Consumers…
Seeking to certify a nationwide settlement class, excluding California consumers, in litigation against the company that makes the hazelnut spread Nutella®, two named plaintiffs alleging deceptive product marketing have filed their brief in support of preliminary approval of a class settlement. In re: Nutella Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., No. 11-1086 (D.N.J., brief filed January 10, 2012). According to the plaintiffs, the company has agreed to cease the advertising at issue, begin a revised and corrective labeling and advertising campaign, change its website, and establish a $2.5 million settlement fund. Under the proposed agreement, settlement class members could submit claims for $4 per jar purchased during the class period and recover up to a maximum of $20. Nutella would also apparently agree not to oppose class counsel fees less than $3 million. According to the plaintiffs’ brief, similar litigation pending in California is also being settled. Twelve named plaintiffs in four…
