The Second Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action that alleged Abbott Laboratories Inc. falsely represented its Similac Advance Organic Infant Formula as organic, ruling the plaintiffs’ state-law claims are barred by the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Marentette v. Abbott Labs. Inc., No. 17-0062 (2d Cir., entered March 23, 2018). The plaintiffs alleged that Abbott misled consumers because the product contained ingredients not permitted by the OFPA. The appeals court asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to submit an amicus brief addressing (i) whether the certification process requires the certifying agent to review and approve the ingredients of the final product to be labeled organic and (ii) whether products made in accordance with a properly certified plan will necessarily comply with the OFPA. According to the decision, USDA stated that “certifying agents review and approve both the process and the ingredients of the final product…
Tag Archives preemption
Sanderson Farms Inc. lost a motion to dismiss false advertising claims brought by three advocacy organizations when a California federal court ruled that the claims are not preempted by either the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) or the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA). Organic Consumers Ass’n v. Sanderson Farms Inc., No. 17-3592 (N.D. Cal., entered February 9, 2018). The groups alleged that Sanderson’s marketing materials—which asserted that the poultry was “100% Natural” with “no hidden ingredients” and that “100% natural means there’s only chicken in our chicken”—were misleading because of U.S. Department of Agriculture testing reportedly showing the presence of antibiotics, ketamine, pesticides and “other unnatural substance residues.” The court found that consumer-protection laws “are within the historic police powers resting with the states and are therefore subject to the presumption against preemption ... Consequently, they cannot be superseded by federal law or action unless it is the ‘clear and…
A California federal court will allow to proceed a suit alleging that Kellogg’s breakfast cereals and bars are unhealthy because of excess added sugars, finding that the labeling and packaging of 24 named products “contain at least one statement that is not preempted, non-misleading or puffery as a matter of law.” Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Co., No. 16-4955 (N.D. Cal., entered August 10, 2017). The court rejected Kellogg’s argument that the company accurately disclosed the ingredients of its products and complied with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling guidelines. The court also found that because FDA “expressly decided” not to set a level for sugar that would disqualify a product from making health or nutrient-content claims, any allegation that Kellogg’s product labeling was misleading because of a certain amount of added sugar was preempted by the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. However, the court refused to preempt a claim…
A Pennsylvania appeals court has upheld Philadelphia’s tax on the distribution of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), rejecting arguments that it is a duplicate sales tax or is preempted by state tax laws. Williams v. City of Philadelphia, Nos. 2077, 2078 (Pa. Commonwealth Ct., order entered June 14, 2017). The court held that the subject matter of the tax—the non-retail distribution of SSBs—is “distinct” from the sales tax collected when the beverages are sold to a retail purchaser, and thus the distribution tax is not duplicative of an existing tax. In addition, the court said, the tax is not preempted under state law because Pennsylvania cities have the right to tax transactions that are not already subject to state tax or license fees. Nor is it preempted by the federal Food Stamp Act or related tax laws because the tax is levied on the distributors of SSBs and “no recipient of program…
A California federal court has granted a motion to dismiss a consolidated proposed class action alleging Trader Joe’s underfilled its five-ounce cans of tuna, holding the plaintiffs’ claims are preempted by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). In re Trader Joe’s Tuna Litig., No. 16-1371 (C.D. Cal., order entered June 2, 2017). The plaintiffs commissioned the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to test several varieties of Trader Joe’s canned tuna, and the agency apparently determined that some cans were filled as much as 25 percent below the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) minimum. Additional information on one of the consolidated complaints appears in Issue 589 of this Update. Trader Joe’s argued that the weights listed on the labels were accurate and that the plaintiffs’ claim was preempted by federal law because it was based on an alleged violation of FDA standards. The court agreed, finding the FDCA…
A California federal court granted Campbell Soup Co.’s motion to dismiss a putative class action claiming the company “falsely and misleadingly labeled and advertised” one of its soups, ruling that the plaintiff’s claims are expressly preempted by federal law. Brower v. Campbell Soup Co., No. 16-1005 (S.D. Cal., order entered March 21, 2017). The plaintiffs alleged that Campbell’s Chunky Healthy Request Grilled Chicken & Sausage Gumbo was mislabeled and advertised as healthy despite containing artificial trans fat. Additional details about the complaint appear in Issue 602 of this Update. Campbell contended that the plaintiff’s claims were preempted by the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) and the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), both of which prohibit the sale of products with false or misleading labeling or marketing. Pursuant to both statutes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) inspects and approves product labels. The court agreed, noting…
An Oregon federal court has dismissed a lawsuit alleging Gerber’s Graduates® Puffs is mislabeled because its packaging displays fruits and vegetables not contained in the product. Henry v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 15-2201 (D. Ore., order entered April 18, 2016). The court first denied the plaintiff’s request to remand the case to state court, then turned to Gerber’s motion to dismiss the claims based on preemption by the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Gerber argued that U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations allow the company to provide visual depictions of the product’s “‛characterizing flavor,’ even if the product does not actually contain any of the depicted fruit, or indeed any fruit at all.” The court agreed, finding that the law is “clear,” even if the “wisdom of the FDA’s regulations on this topic is a different question for a different day.” The court dismissed the case but granted…
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 Texas federal court has dismissed multidistrict litigation (MDL) alleging that Whole Foods Market Inc. lists incorrect amounts of sugar on its yogurt labels, concluding the Consumer Reports data relied on by the plaintiffs did not meet federal standards. In re Whole Foods Mkt. Inc. Greek Yogurt Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2588 (W.D. Tex., Austin Div., order entered February 16, 2016). The consumers claimed Whole Foods’ store-brand yogurt contains 11.4 grams of sugar per serving, while the listed sugar content is 2 grams. Details about some of the 11 consolidated lawsuits appear in Issues 533 and 534 of this Update. Whole Foods argued that the consumers’ claims were preempted by the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) because the scientific testing techniques used by Consumer Reports failed to comply with the testing methodology determined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The court agreed, noting that…
The California Supreme Court has held that a consumer may sue Herb Thyme Farms, Inc. alleging its herbs are improperly labeled as “organic,” dismissing the farm’s contention that the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 blocks such claims. Quesada v. Herb Thyme Farms, Inc., No. S216305 (Cal., order entered December 3, 2015). Details about previous court rulings concluding that the federal law preempted the action appear in Issues 347 and 509 of this Update. The court found that, contrary to the farm’s arguments, the federal statute does not prohibit consumers from seeking redress. “[T]he complaint here alleges Herb Thyme has engaged in fraud by intentionally labeling conventionally grown herbs as organic, thereby pocketing the additional premiums organic produce commands. The purposes and objectives underlying the Organic Foods Act do not suggest such suits are an obstacle; to the contrary, a core reason for the act was to create a clear…
12
