Tag: labeling
-
Putative Class Claims Hemp Beverages Not “All Natural”
A California resident has filed a putative nationwide class action against Pacific Foods of Oregon, Inc., alleging that the company falsely labels its Hemp NonDairy Beverage® products as “all natural” despite the presence of processed and artificial ingredients and misbrands them by listing as an ingredient “evaporated cane juice.” Perera v. Pac. Foods of Or.,…
-
Court Refuses to Dismiss “All Natural” Frozen Smoothie Kit Claims
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss putative class claims that Jamba Juice falsely labels its frozen smoothie kits as “all natural,” finding that while the plaintiffs lack standing to assert claims related to products they did not buy, “they may seek to represent a class of people who have purchased…
-
Putative Class Targets Whole Foods’ “All Natural” Food Labels
California residents have filed a putative class action against Whole Foods Market, alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling certain snack products as “All Natural” because they contain “the synthetic chemical ingredient Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, among other synthetic ingredients (e.g., Maltodextrin).” Garrison v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc., No. 13-5222 (N.D. Cal., filed November 8,…
-
WSJ Notes Labeling Trend Away from “Natural”
According to Wall Street Journal reporter Mike Esterl, products with the “natural” or “all natural” label represented $40 billion in retail sales in the United States in the preceding 12 months and market researchers have found that more than 50 percent of Americans seek the “all natural” label when they shop for food. Still, food…
-
Another Court Refers “All Natural” Litigation Issue to FDA
A federal court in New Jersey has, on the basis of the primary jurisdiction doctrine, halted proceedings alleging that General Mills misleads consumers by labeling its Kix® cereals with bioengineered corn as “made with all natural corn.” In re General Mills, Inc. Kix Cereal Litig., No. 12-249 (D.N.J., order entered November 1, 2013). Citing rulings from…
-
Washington State Rejects GM Labeling
Washington state voters have reportedly rejected a ballot initiative that would have required front-of-package labeling for genetically modified (GM) food products, seeds and other agricultural commodities. According to the Washington Secretary of State, 53 percent of voters ultimately opposed the initiative, which was hotly contested by consumer advocates, food companies, physicians, and farmers in the…
-
Canada’s Agriculture Minister Riles Some over COOL Remarks
Speaking during a North American Meat Association conference in Chicago, Canada Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz reportedly called on the United States to resolve a dispute over country-of-origin labeling (COOL) requirements for pork and beef by including provisions in the Farm Bill currently under consideration in the U.S. Congress. Ritz claimed that the rules, now before…
-
FSIS Issues Final Generic Meat Labeling Rules
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Services (FSIS) has issued a final rule amending the meat and poultry products inspection regulations “to expand the circumstances in which FSIS will generically approve the labels of meat and poultry products.” Effective January 6, 2014, the final rule will also consolidate the regulations governing meat…