Four years after filing a citizen petition with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seeking a prohibition on the use of partially hydrogenated oils containing artificial trans fat in food for human consumption, 98-year-old University of Illinois Emeritus Professor of Comparative Biosciences Fred Kummerow has filed a lawsuit seeking an order compelling an agency response to his petition and a declaration that its failure to ban trans fats violates the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Kummerow v. Hamburg, No. 13-2180 (C.D. Ill., filed August 9, 2013). The complaint details the history of the ingredient’s invention and research, including the plaintiff’s own, demonstrating its “harmful effects,” including inhibition of an enzyme necessary to prevent blood clots in the arteries and veins. The plaintiff also distinguishes between artificial and natural trans fats, noting that he does not seek a ban on the latter. According to the complaint, Kummerow learned in 2004…
Tag Archives trans fat
A federal court in California has dismissed with prejudice the breach of warranty claims made by a putative class as to purportedly “misbranded food products” sold by 7-Eleven, but dismissed the remaining consumer fraud claims without prejudice to allow the plaintiff to amend the complaint to meet the stringent pleading requirements for fraud-based allegations. Bishop v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 12-2621 (N.D. Cal., order entered August 5, 2013). While the plaintiff defined “misbranded food products” as pertaining to potato chips, pretzels and other foods labeled “0 grams Trans Fat,” “No Cholesterol,” “All Natural,” “Fresh to Go,” “guaranteed fresh,” or “Fresh,” as well as products “sold in oversized slack filled container,” the court determined that he failed to “provide a clear and particular account of the allegedly fraudulent, deceptive, misrepresentative, or otherwise unlawful statements” and failed to “unambiguously specify the particular products that have violated particular labeling requirements, the allegedly unlawful representations that…
An Ohio appeals court has determined that Ohio legislators improperly enacted an appropriations bill rider that was intended to preempt a Cleveland ordinance prohibiting the use of “industrially produced trans fat” in foods prepared by retail food establishments and food service operations, such as fast-food restaurants, unless the foods were served “in a manufacturer’s original sealed package.” City of Cleveland v. Ohio, No. 98616 (Ohio Ct. App., 8th App. Dist., Cuyahoga Cty., decided March 28, 2013). Additional information about Cleveland’s lawsuit challenging the state law appears in Issue 422 of this Update. The court agreed with the city that the state law was an unconstitutional attempt to preempt the city from exercising its home rule powers under the state constitution and that the provisions, enacted as amendments to a state appropriations bill, violated the constitution’s one subject rule. In determining that the appropriations bill amendment was not a “general law,” the…
A California resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Nestlé USA, Inc., claiming that its use of partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (trans fat) in many of its frozen pizza brands, including DiGiorno®, Stouffer’s® and California Pizza Kitchen® violates California’s Unfair Competition Law and constitutes a nuisance under California Civil Code §§ 3479-3493. Simpson v. Cal. Pizza Kitchen, No. 13-164 (S.D. Cal., filed January 21, 2013). In addition to monetary damages, she seeks an order requiring the company to “cease using artificial trans fat as an ingredient in the Nestle Trans Fat Pizzas.” While the complaint includes detailed information about the purported risks of consuming trans fats and notes that California forbids its use in schools or restaurants in amounts greater than a half-gram per serving, nowhere does she allege what quantity of trans fat is used in the defendants’ products or whether the products are mislabeled. Plaintiff Katie…
A recent study has reportedly concluded that a New York City regulation restricting the use of partially hydrogenated vegetable oil by all food service establishments “was associated with a substantial and statistically significant decrease in the trans fat content of purchases at fast-food chains, without a commensurate increase in saturated fat.” Sonia Angell, et al., “Change in Trans Fatty Acid Content of Fast-Food Purchases Associated with New York City’s Restaurant Regulation,” Annals of Internal Medicine, July 2012. Funded by New York City and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Health Eating Research Program, researchers between 2007 and 2009 conducted a cross-sectional study matching purchase receipts with available nutrition information and consumer surveys at 168 randomly selected locations of 11 fast-food chains. Compared with data gathered before the trans fat restrictions took effect, the information collected after the regulation’s implementation allegedly demonstrated “an associated large and probably clinically meaningful reduction in the…
Seeking to represent a statewide class of product purchasers, a California resident has filed a putative class action against Costco, alleging that the company falsely sells its Kirkland Signature Kettle Brand Potato Chips®, which purportedly contain “more than 13 grams of fat per 50 grams,” with a “0 Trans Fat” label. Thomas v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 12-2908 (N.D. Cal., filed June 5, 2012). Citing 21 C.F.R. § 101.13(h), plaintiff Karen Thomas contends that the defendant is “prohibited from making the unqualified nutrient claims of ‘0 grams Trans Fat’ on its food products if they contain fat in excess of 13 grams, saturated fat in excess of 4 grams, cholesterol in excess of 60 milligrams, or sodium in excess of 480 mg per 50 grams, unless the product also displays a disclosure statement that informs consumers of the product’s fat, saturated fat and sodium levels.” She alleges that the product…
A Cuyahoga County, Ohio, court has reportedly determined that a state law prohibiting municipalities from regulating the ingredients used in prepared foods, such as restaurant meals and grocery or bakery takeout items, does not preempt Cleveland’s ordinance prohibiting retail food establishments from selling foods containing trans fats. Cleveland announced the ban in April 2011, and several months later, Ohio’s General Assembly amended the state’s budget with a provision prohibiting municipalities from restricting the food at food service establishments “based on the food nutrition information.” Cleveland sued the legislature in January 2012, contending that it had encroached on its home rule authority. City of Cleveland v. Ohio, No. cv-12- 772529 (Ohio Ct. Com. Pl., Cuyahoga Cty., decided June 11, 2012). Additional information about the lawsuit appears in Issue 422 of this Update. The court apparently agreed, noting in the case docket that the amendment was unconstitutional and that the city’s enactment…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action filed against Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, Inc., alleging that the company misrepresented its products by labeling them as “0g Trans Fat” when they actually contain some trans fat per serving. Carrea v. Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, Inc., No. 11-15263 (9th Cir., decided April 5, 2012) (unpublished). According to the court, because the products contain less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving, “the Nutrition Facts panel must express this amount as zero” under federal law, and the “same rule applies to the statement” on the front-of-package label. “In essence,” said the court, “Carrea seeks to enjoin and declare unlawful the very statement that federal law permits and defines. Such relief would impose a burden through state law that is not identical to the requirements under section 343(r). These claims are therefore expressly preempted.” The court also found…
Contending that snack maker Frito-Lay North America makes “improper nutrient content claims on products containing disqualifying levels of fat, saturated fat, cholesterol or sodium,” a new plaintiff has filed a putative class action against the company and its parent in a California federal court. Wilson v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., No. 12-1586 (N.D. Cal., filed March 29, 2012). Several other cases have recently been filed against the company, challenging its “all natural” claims for products allegedly containing genetically modified ingredients. The new action targets the company’s “0 grams of trans fat” representations on its Lay’s Classic Chips® “despite disqualifying levels of fat that far exceed the 13g disclosure level.” The plaintiff reportedly cites Food and Drug Administration warnings to other companies “for the same type of improper 0 grams trans fat nutrient content claims at issue in this case.” See Foodnavigator-usa.com, April 4, 2012.
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…
