Food and Beverage

Recently, a federal judge sitting in the Eastern District of California (Sacramento), for the first time, refused to require a manufacturer to place a Prop 65 warning on its product based on a finding that the requirement would violate the company’s First Amendment rights. We have been following…

Fresh off a victory in the CA primary, California Attorney General Xavier Bacerra filed suit on June 7, 2018 against Nutraceutical Corporation of Park City, Utah and Graceleigh, Inc. dba Sammy’s Milk of Newport Beach, CA, alleging violations of California’s Proposition 65 and California’s consumer protection laws.

As this space has addressed before (see here and here), the California Transparency in Supply Chain Act (Civ. Code section 1714.43), enacted in 2010, requires large retailers and manufacturers (those with worldwide sales in excess of $100 million) doing business in California to disclose on their websites their…

A recent Federal Court decision on the issue of whether to grant a preliminary injunction in the ongoing saga of the appropriateness of adding the pesticide Glyphosate to the CA Prop 65 list (see prior posts, here and here) has become the grist for the “Fake News” phenomenon.…

Much of the recent discussion regarding Prop 65 has been focused on the regulatory changes going into effect in August of 2018. And that makes sense since there will be significant changes to the warnings, responsibility, and labeling obligations on product websites. There is, however, other activity that…

As we reported on previously (see here and here), FDA recently tussled with the manufacturer of an innovative vegan condiment called “Just Mayo” based on the existence of a Federal standard of identity for mayonnaise that requires the food product to incorporate eggs.

On July 24, 2017, the Food and Drug Administration announced that it had responded to a November 2015 petition from Royal Hawaiian Macadamia Nut, Inc. for a new qualified health claim characterizing the relationship between macadamia nut consumption and a reduced risk of coronary heart disease (CHD).

California’s Safe Drinking Water & Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (affectionately known as “Proposition 65”) has long been the subject of discussion, both pro and con. Much of the conversation is on various issues surrounding the enforcement of Proposition 65 (for example, see a prior post here). In…

As we’ve previously reported, FDA has signaled its interest in reviewing the scope and meaning of the nutrient content claim “healthy,” in part as result of a dispute with KIND LLC about label claims for its KIND Bar products. Then last fall FDA released a new guidance document…

Some of our colleagues from Mintz Levin’s Class Action Practice, Joshua Briones, Crystal Lopez, and Grace Rosales, recently authored an interesting and timely article in the Bloomberg BNA Product Safety & Liability Reporter. The article examines certain defenses in consumer fraud class actions over product labeling – specifically,…

On December 6th, FDA announced that it is publicly releasing data received by the Agency’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) about adverse events related to cosmetics and foods, including both conventional foods and dietary supplements. Adverse events can be any negative reaction to a product,…

On November 8, 2016, California voters approved Proposition 67, the statewide ban on carry-out plastic bags, by 52 percent. At the same time, California voters rejected Proposition 65 by 55 percent–a measure that would have sent the proceeds from sales of paper bags and reusable bags to environmental…

As it signaled it would be doing earlier this year, FDA has initiated a public process to redefine the implied nutrient content claim “healthy” when it is used on food labels and labeling. In addition, while the process is underway, the Agency intends to exercise enforcement discretion for…

After launching with an ambitious agenda fourteen months ago (as we wrote about here), last Friday the Obama Administration announced that its Biotechnology Working Group had completed its two main tasks. The Working Group has proposed an Update to the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology, and…

As a parting act before its seven-week recess, the House last Thursday passed by a vote of 306-117 Senator Pat Roberts’s (R-KS) legislation (S.764) requiring the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Already approved by the Senate last week, the bill is now expected to be signed into law…

Four months after the Senate defeated a GE labeling bill (S.2609) introduced by Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-KS), the upper chamber Thursday night passed, 63-30, a compromise measure (S. 764) that Roberts co-wrote with Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), the Ag Committee’s Ranking Member.

Evaporated cane juice, a term usually used to inform about sweeteners derived from the fluid extract of sugar cane, is present on the ingredient lists of many products we see on grocery store shelves. However, newly finalized FDA guidance on use of the term “evaporated cane juice” (“ECJ”)…

On May 17, 2016, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) announced that it is allowing an additional 200,000 short tons of cane sugar imports to meet food manufacturers’ increasing demand for non-genetically modified sugar products. In its news release, the agency explained that

As any company making and selling food products knows, late last year FDA requested information and comments regarding the appropriate use of the term “natural” for food – the Agency asked what types of processing make that claim misleading, or does the food have to be completely unprocessed?…

Earlier this month, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) issued a Notice of Emergency Action to allow temporary use of a standard point-of-sale warning message for bisphenol A (“BPA”) exposures from canned and bottled foods and beverages. This emergency rulemaking came only three weeks before California’s…

On July 1, 2016, Vermont’s Act 120 will require food manufacturers to indicate in the labeling of all products regulated by FDA when the food has been produced with the use of genetic engineering (GE). Unless Congress acts with unusual swiftness to pass federal legislation regarding GE or…

Last week, FDA finalized new food safety regulations seeking to ensure the sanitary transport of human and animal food, as required under the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The final Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food Rule will affect shippers, loaders, carriers, and receivers of food transported…

In the wake of the Senate’s defeat of legislation that would have preempted state-mandated GE ingredient labeling on food products, a new trend is emerging, as one food manufacturer after another announces that they will voluntarily label bioengineered ingredients contained in their national food product lines. The chain…

We recently blogged about a new wave of class action litigation related to California’s Transparency in Supply Chains Act. In December, Nestlé USA won the dismissal of a complaint against it alleging that the company was “obligated to inform consumers that some proportion of its cat food products…

The latest salvo in the legislative food fight over genetically engineered (GE) ingredients came from the Senate, where Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-KS) has introduced a bill that would instruct the Secretary of Agriculture to create a voluntary food labeling standard for bioengineered foods. Perhaps most importantly,…

Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) contained a scene where bodies of plague victims were brought out to the curb for collection via a cart whether or not they properly belonged there. One living fellow insists on not being dead by exclaiming: “I’m not dead yet.” Unfortunately…

Reversing course from the end of 2015, FDA recently announced an import ban on genetically engineered (GE) salmon until such a time as comprehensive labeling guidelines are introduced. Despite FDA’s approval of GE salmon in November 2015, the agency appears to have bowed to congressional pressure and placed…

Back in September we blogged about the Warning Letter that FDA issued to Hampton Creek Foods, Inc. for its vegan food dressing and sandwich spread, “Just Mayo” and a similar product, “Just Mayo Sriracha.” In addition to several other interesting labeling violations, FDA noted that “Just Mayo” was…

On Tuesday, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee unanimously approved the President’s nomination of Dr. Robert Califf as the next commissioner of food and drugs. (Senator Bernie Sanders, I-VT, who would have voted against the nomination, was not present at the January 12th committee session.)…

The first round goes to the industry: on December 9, 2015, the Central District of California dismissed the complaint in Barber v. Nestle USA, a key bellwether case in a new wave of class action litigation related to California’s Transparency in Supply Chains Act. The Barber plaintiffs’ theory…

The 2016 Omnibus Spending Bill recently passed by both houses of Congress ushers in important developments in the food safety, labeling, and nutrition spaces. Following House and Senate votes December 18, it now goes to President Obama for his signature.

On December 2, 2015, the Grocery Manufacturers Association announced SmartLabel, a pioneering technology initiative that gives manufacturers and retailers an important new channel for disclosing information about their products directly to consumers. Through SmartLabel, simply by searching online or scanning the bar code on a product’s label, consumers…

Last week will undoubtedly be marked in the annals of Food and Drug Administration history as an important milestone for the Agency. On November 19, 2015, FDA approved the first genetically engineered (GE) animal intended for use as human food – AquaBounty Technologies’s AquAdvantage Salmon, a transgenic Atlantic…

On November 12, 2015, FDA is scheduled to publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing a request for public comments on the use of the term “natural” in food labeling. As the Agency points out, it has been under pressure in recent years from many stakeholders to…

A bluntly labeled section of the Code of Federal Regulations – “Mayonnaise” – provides a description of this particular food dressing, the food’s required ingredients, optional ingredients, and how to declare those ingredients. The goals of this and other standardized food definitions are to prevent economic fraud on…

Today the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015 passed the House, in a vote of 275 to 150 (more information here). Still a hot-button issue, opposition to the Act is emotionally charged, with those opposed to the bill calling it the “DARK” Act (Denying Americans the…

The proposed Federal regulation of GMOs is proceeding. Following the White House’s recent action on GMOs, Representative Pompeo’s “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act” (H.R. 1599) was passed by the House Agriculture Committee on July 14.

Last week, the White House waded into the GMO regulatory fray with the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s (OSTP) announcement of a major overhaul of GMO regulation.

Acting to finalize a tentative decision from 2013, FDA announced on June 15, 2015 that it was issuing a declaratory order that will require manufacturers to remove partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) from processed foods over the next three years. PHOs in ready-to-eat foods like baked goods, snack foods,…

As many readers of this blog know, the start of 2011 saw the enactment of a massive bill aimed at overhauling the nation’s food safety system to become more preventive instead of reactive to safety problems and illness outbreaks. Among the numerous significant new regulations, requirements, and programs…

Joining the rising tide of local GMO legislation, last week voters in Benton County, Oregon defeated the Benton County Local Food System Ordinance, which would have prohibited the cultivation of GMO crops in the county. The proposed legislation follows on the heels of a Jackson County, Oregon GMO…

Despite a stiff litigation challenge from the food industry, Vermont’s GMO-labeling campaign marches on. This week saw major developments in the suit brought by the Grocery Manufacturers’ Association and other food industry groups challenging the constitutionality of Vermont’s GMO-labeling law, Act 120. Each side won an important victory…

Coming on the heels of the reintroduction of the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act, on March 3, 2015, the New York State Assembly Committee on Consumer Affairs and Protection voted 9 to 6, with one abstention, to pass bill A.617, which would require food made with genetically modified…

A vote by European Union (EU) lawmakers in mid-January gave individual governments within the 28-nation bloc the authority to decide whether genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can be grown and cultivated within their borders. The move will give individual member states the ability to prohibit or restrict the cultivation…

This has been a big year for GMO legislation. In 2014 alone, 25 states have proposed 67 pieces of legislation aimed either at the labeling of products containing GMOs or at the ban of GMO-containing crops. While this space has strived to keep you up-to-date with the latest…

In a recent post, we detailed lawsuits filed by corn exporters, farmers, and other stakeholders against Syngenta Corp. regarding its marketing of corn which contains genetically modified (“GMO”) traits that have not been approved for export to countries such as China. On December 11, 2014, the Judicial Panel…

As we’ve explored in past posts, Congress is currently considering a bill that aims to harmonize the patchwork of state efforts at regulating GMO labeling by placing such regulation firmly within FDA’s jurisdiction. Dubbed the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act (H.R. 4432), this bill would give FDA…

As we’ve explored in past posts, mandatory GMO-labeling legislation has, at best, a spotty track record among state legislatures. Nevertheless, the GMO issue continues to draw the public’s attention, and it is becoming clear that the “Non-GMO” label now appeals to at least certain segments of the consumer…

Bids to require mandatory labeling of foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMO) were voted down in Colorado and Oregon on Tuesday. Colorado voters rejected Proposition 105, with nearly 70% of voters saying no; while Oregon voters rejected Measure 92, with only 50.9% against the initiative, and 49.1% in…

On October 20, 2014, FDA reached a settlement with the Center for Food Safety (“CFS”) in litigation pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This litigation is related to FDA’s rule for food additives that are “generally recognized as safe” (“GRAS”). In 1997, FDA…

In April 2010, the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT) sued Starbucks Corp. and other coffee sellers alleging they violated California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, passed by California voters in 1986 as Proposition 65, by failing to warn consumers about carcinogens in their…

A recent class action settlement has brought fresh attention to two age-old questions. The first: does Red Bull actually give you wings? The second: how carefully should courts screen out bogus claimants from proposed classes of refund-seeking consumers?

On September 19, 2014, FDA announced potential changes to four rules that the agency proposed in 2013 to implement the Food Safety and Modernization Act (“FSMA”). FSMA was signed into law in January 2011 in response to many reported incidents of food-borne illness during the 2000s.

This space has thoroughly explored the various forms of civil liability food companies face for the mislabeling and/or deceptive marketing of their products. Last week, a set of landmark convictions in a criminal food-safety prosecution potentially signal increased criminal liability for food companies when matters of public health…

Throughout the year, this space has periodically re-visited the topic of regulating the manufacture and labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients (GMOs) at the state and federal level. This week, a lawsuit out of Kauai, Hawaii shed light on the fate of these regulations at the county…

In June, we reported on a suit brought by the Grocery Manufacturers Association (“GMA”) seeking to rescind Vermont’s new GMO-labeling statute, Act 120. As we explained in that post, the GMA argues that Act 120 is doubly unconstitutional: not only does the law violate the Commerce and Supremacy…

Last week, a California federal judge revived a putative class action accusing Amy’s Kitchen Inc. of misleading customers by labeling sugar as “evaporated cane juice” on its products. In a finding that puts the case on hold until the FDA weighs in, Judge Illston found that a decision…

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled, 8-0, that Pom Wonderful LLC could pursue mislabeling claims under the federal Lanham Act against the Coca-Cola Company, even though the label at issue complied with FDA labeling regulations. The decision reversed the Ninth Circuit’s 2012 ruling that the FDA’s “comprehensive regulation” of…

In January and April, this space took a look at the growing patchwork of state proposals for regulating the labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients (GMOs). As posited here in April, the recent surge in such bills raises a serious question as to whether any individual state—especially…

In January, this space discussed the Maine and Connecticut laws that would require labeling for foods made with genetically engineered ingredients (GMOs). Each of the bills had a trigger qualification: 4 other states, or states with a combined population of 20 million, had to adopt similar measures. In…

Not to be left behind and not dependent on any other state action (Connecticut and Maine notwithstanding), a bill has been introduced (SB 1381) on February 21, 2014 that requires any food, with certain exceptions (more on that later), offered for retail sale in California to be labeled…

As this blog has reported on numerous occasions, plaintiffs have brought claims challenging labeling of food products for mislabeling. The labels challenged include the use of the term “natural”, “0g trans fat” and the infamous claim of misbranding relating to “crunch berries.”

California’s District Courts have, of late, become the go-to jurisdictions for plaintiffs bringing ‘natural’ labeling lawsuits against national food manufacturers. This is due, in large part, to California’s consumer-friendly Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumer’s Legal Remedies Act. California District Courts may be sending a different…

As this space has pointed out on several occasions, California’s laws are nothing, if not unique. One such law is California’s Business & Professions Code Section 12606.2 which prohibits a container or package from having false bottoms, false sidewalls, a false lid or covering or to “facilitate the…

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’”

Proposed legislation has been introduced by 3 members of the House, including Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), senior Democrat on the House Energy & Commerce Health Subcommittee, which would direct the Secretary of Health & Human Services (HHS) to create a single, standard front-of-package labeling system for all food…

Would “reasonable consumers” have regarded Paul Cezanne as highly had he painted numerous versions of still life with froot?

A question before district courts these days seems to be whether 100% natural molasses move any slower than the FDA. In July, the Food Court in the Northern District of California asked FDA to opine on the proper use and application of “whether and under what circumstances food…

On August 5, 2013 the FDA issued its final rule on the voluntary labeling of food gluten-free. This is good news for both consumers and manufacturers.

Manufacturers are removing “natural” statements from their labels, both as part of lawsuit settlements and as an alternate marketing strategy. PepsiCo has agreed to remove the phrase from its Naked juices after a lawsuit was filed against it in California, stating that it will wait for more detailed…

In what may be an indication of things to come, the Food Court (US District Court Northern District of California) has decided to ask FDA for guidance on what it wants on food labels. The Food Court directly addressed the labeling of foods containing GMOs as “natural” in…

Some are concerned that the potential health consequence of the use of genetically modified organisms in food is unknown because of the lack of long-term testing proving that it is safe. Fearful consumers imagine “Franken foods,” conjuring up images of over-sized ears of corn that shuffle about the…

When should a court decide a case that has issues involving an area that Congress has already weighed in on? In the case of cosmetics and FDA, when a lawsuit requires a court to decide an issue committed to FDA’s expertise without a clear indication of how FDA…

Are you for or against GMOs? Do you think the government should get involved? Whether for or against legislation requiring labeling showing any Genetically Modified Organism contained in your food, the fact that the two sides are diametrically opposed on interpretation of critical aspects will ensure litigation. In…

It’s 2 o’clock in the afternoon, you need a snack – maybe a granola bar, but which one? Does the package that boasts it is “100% Natural” win out over the one that is only “All Natural”? Would you even consider one that is merely “Natural”? Well, don’t…