Tag: D.C.
-
Federal Court Could Rule in COOL Dispute Within Two Weeks
According to a news source, the federal court that heard a challenge to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) revision to its country-of-origin labeling (COOL) rules to comply with a World Trade Organization ruling stated during the hearing that it would issue a decision on the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction within 14 days.…
-
COOL Dispute Intensifies Before D.C. Court and WTO
A federal court in the District of Columbia will consider on August 27, 2013, whether to issue a preliminary injunction to stop the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) from implementing country-of-origin labeling (COOL) program changes required by a 2011 World Trade Organization (WTO) determination that, as initially drafted, the rules gave less favorable treatment to…
-
Counsel Awarded $90.8 Million in Black Farmers’ Discrimination Suit
A federal court has awarded $90.8 million to the attorneys who represented African-American farmers in litigation against the U.S. Department of Agriculture alleging discrimination in the loan application process. In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litig., No. 08-0511 (D.D.C., decided July 11, 2013). Additional details about class counsels’ request appear in Issue 405 of this Update. Explaining…
-
Meat Trade Groups Challenge COOL Labeling Regulations
Trade organizations representing the interests of cattle and pork producers and meat processors in Canada and the United States have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), challenging country-of-origin (COOL) labeling regulations that took effect May 23, 2013. Am. Meat Inst. v. USDA, No. 13-1033 (D.D.C., filed July 8, 2013). They seek declaratory…
-
D.C. Circuit Dismisses Challenge to USDA Almond Rules
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a challenge to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rules requiring California almonds sold domestically to be treated with heat or chemicals to prevent the spread of Salmonella. Koretoff v. Vilsack, No. 12-5075 (D.C. Cir., decided February 22, 2013). According to the court, the almond producers who mounted…
-
How Far Can Government Go in Forcing Manufacturers to Tell Consumers “Don’t Buy This Product”?
A divided D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that the graphic antismoking images which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) selected for placement on cigarette packages for the purpose of reducing smoking rates in the United States fail the intermediate scrutiny standard for compelled commercial speech. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. FDA, No. 11-5332…
-
Non-Profit Sues Nestlé Alleging Deceptive Advertising of Children’s Nutrition Drink
The National Consumers League has filed a consumer fraud action in a Washington, D.C. court against Nestlé HealthCare Nutrition, Inc., alleging that the company falsely advertises its BOOST Kid Essentials® drinks as products that can strengthen children’s immune systems and aid their digestive systems. The Nat’l Consumers League v. Nestlé HealthCare Nutrition, Inc., No. 5772-10 (D.C.…
-
Colombians Sue Chiquita in U.S. Court for Alleged Terror Campaign
Nearly 1,000 unnamed plaintiffs, who claim to be family members of individuals purportedly killed by terrorist organizations in Colombia’s Urabá region, have sued Chiquita Brands International, Inc., alleging that throughout the 1990s and at least until 2004, the company “funded, armed, and otherwise supported” these organizations “to produce bananas in an environment free from labor…