A consumer has filed a proposed class action against Hormel Foods Corp. alleging the company misrepresents its meat products as natural and free of preservatives despite containing synthetic or genetically modified ingredients, including cultured celery powder, baking powder and maltodextrin. Phelps v. Hormel Foods Corp., No. 16-62411 (S.D. Fla., Ft. Lauderdale Div., filed October 11, 2016). The lawsuit, focused on Hormel’s Natural Choice® line of products, echoes similar claims in a complaint filed by the Animal Legal Defense Fund in June 2016. Details on that complaint appear in Issue 610 of this Update. “The U.S. Department of Agriculture (‘USDA’) takes into account the level of processing in its policy on natural claims on food labeling,” the consumer complaint asserts. “The USDA allows such products to be labeled ‘natural’ when ‘(1) The product does not contain any artificial flavor or flavoring, coloring ingredient, or chemical preservative [], or any other artificial…
Tag Archives meat
A California federal court has granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. misleadingly advertises its food as free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) despite allegedly selling flour and corn tortillas with GMOs, using GMO soy in its cooking oils and serving meat and dairy products derived from animals fed GMO feed. Pappas v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., No. 16-0612 (S.D. Cal., order entered August 31, 2016). Chipotle argued that reasonable consumers would not “equate ‘nonGMO ingredients’ with ingredients not derived from animals that have eaten genetically modified feed.” The plaintiff argued that the reasonable consumer standard was not applicable at the motion-to-dismiss stage in a fraud or deception case, but the court found that the standard could be used to hold the plaintiff’s allegations to be implausible. The court compared the plaintiff’s meat and dairy allegations to a case…
The Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) has reportedly filed a lawsuit against Hormel Foods challenging the company’s Natural Choice® brand of lunch meats and bacon, which it advertises as “100% Natural” and “All-Natural.” In a June 30, 2016, press release, an ALDF attorney argued that the Natural Choice® meats “come from the same pigs and the same giant, factory slaughterhouses that are used for the company’s canned Spam® products” and that the products are treated with “acid starter culture” to produce artificial preservatives. “Meat companies like Hormel have been quick to pounce on misconceptions about what ‘natural’ means,” Animal Legal Defense Fund Executive Director Stephen Wells was quoted as saying in the press release. “As an organization dedicated to transparency in animal agriculture and truth in meat advertising, the Animal Legal Defense Fund is standing up to vindicate the rights of deceived consumers and to prevent Hormel from wrongfully gaining…
Consumers have filed a putative class action against Albertson’s Inc. and Safeway Inc. alleging the companies raise prices on meat during “buy one get one free” (BOGO) deals, resulting in consumers “actually paying for the meat that is sold as ‘free’ in these special sales.” Stewart v. Albertson’s Inc., No. 16-15125 (Ore. Cir. Ct., Multnomah Cty., filed May 4, 2016). The complaint asserts the stores rotate BOGO offers on a number of meat products, including pork chops, chicken breast and beef sirloin, but offer the products at lower prices when they are not on special. Further, the stores “sell the same meat products at regular [loyalty card] prices that are lower than the BOGO prices. When they do this, Defendants sometimes sell the same product under different names.” The plaintiffs offer an example: “Safeway sold boneless, skinless chicken breasts to [loyalty card] members for $1.99 per pound. At the same…
A California federal court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) alleging Whole Foods Market Inc. misrepresents its meat products as humanely slaughtered with its Global Animal Partnership (GAP) 5-Step® Rating System. PETA v. Whole Foods Mkt. Cal., Inc., No. 15-4301 (N.D. Cal., order entered April 26, 2016). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 579 of this Update, while information about a previous dismissal without prejudice appears in Issue 593. The plaintiffs asserted that Whole Foods’ GAP rating system is a ”‛sham’ that is not actually enforced and the advertisements do not adequately disclose that ‘key animal treatment standards’ under the GAP rating ‘are no better or marginally better than is the common industry practice,’” according to the court. Whole Foods filed a motion to dismiss the case arguing that the plaintiffs failed to allege misrepresentations or an actionable omission under California law, and…
The founder of Midamar, an export company charged with fraud for sending “halal” meat to Malaysia that failed to meet halal slaughtering standards, has reportedly been sentenced to two years in federal prison and ordered to pay $60,000 in fines and $184,983 in disgorgement. Midamar was fined $20,000 and ordered to forfeit $600,000. A U.S. Department of Agriculture investigation revealed that William Aossey, Jr. instructed his employees at Midamar to change the application forms to indicate the meat had been produced at a Malaysia-approved facility instead of Midamar’s unapproved supplier. Aossey was convicted of making false statements on export applications, selling misbranded meat and committing wire and mail fraud in July 2015. The court cited Aossey’s advanced age and lack of criminal history to lower his sentence from the guideline sentencing range of 87-108 months. Aossey’s sons, Jalel and Yahya, have also been convicted of similar charges and will be…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court’s decision that California cannot enforce its statute regulating the empty space between a product and its packaging against producers of meat and poultry products, finding that the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) preempt the statute. Del Real v. Harris, No. 13-16893 (9th Cir., order entered February 12, 2016). California Attorney General Kamala Harris appealed a district court’s permanent injunction barring enforcement of the slack-fill law against Del Real, which produces heat-and-serve meat and poultry products. The appeals court’s opinion cites precedent interpreting the FMIA and PPIA as creating a uniform national labeling standard. “When the FMIA and PPIA’s express preemption clauses are read in light of Congress’s concern for uniformity and a lesser level of regulation, it is unlikely that Congress intended for the states to be allowed to develop and apply…
A California federal court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc. (PETA) alleging Whole Foods Market Inc. falsely advertises its meat as ethically slaughtered. PETA v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 15-4301 (N.D. Cal., order entered January 29, 2016). The organization challenged Whole Foods’ five-step Global Animal Partnership rating as misleading consumers because the assessments are allegedly insufficient. Details on PETA’s complaint appear in Issue 579 of this Update. The court first found that PETA had standing to sue despite the organization’s not being a customer of Whole Foods. The court then turned to Whole Foods’ argument that PETA failed to plead its fraud allegations with the specificity required. The photos included with the complaint were insufficient to fulfill the requirement, the court found, because PETA did not clarify which aspects of the in-store displays were at issue. That vagueness also prevented the court…
“Cancer and Diet: The Latest on Processed Meats, Fats and More” is the title of a January 15, 2016, live forum hosted by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Webcast faculty, including Harvard Professors Walter Willett and Frank Hu, will discuss the World Health Organization’s classification of processed meat as a “Group 1” carcinogen and the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, among other topics. Willett and Hu were quoted in a January 8 Time article about the role of food industry influence on the new guidelines. Issue 589
Responding to public comments solicited in April 2014, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has issued revised guidance for identifying, controlling and labeling allergens and other ingredients of public health concern through hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) plans, sanitation standard operating procedures (SOPs) or other prerequisite programs. Geared toward meat and poultry products, the guidance seeks to ensure “that product labels declare all ingredients, as required in the regulations, and that the product does not contain undeclared allergens or other undeclared ingredients.” See Federal Register, November 16, 2015. Issue 585
