Source: https://www.shb.com/intelligence/newsletters/fblu/fblu-2019/fblu-707/fblu-707-story
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 16:25:31+00:00

Document:
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb reportedly said in a February 27, 2019, hearing before the House Appropriations Committee that the agency will hold public hearings on cannabidiol (CBD) in April 2019. Gottlieb reportedly told the committee that FDA is assembling a working group of senior officials to create rules that would govern CBD in food and other uses. According to CNBC, "Gottlieb floated what a possible framework might look like. He suggested high concentrations might be regulated as a drug that has more stringent oversight while lower concentrations could be categorized as food products that come with an easier review process."
Meanwhile, a New York City crackdown on CBD in food products has reportedly been postponed. Beginning in October 2019, CBS reports, violators selling CBD food may be subject to fines of $200 and risk lower public health letter grades.
The debate over dairy and non-dairy substitute labeling extends to Canada, where a creamery has reportedly been told to stop referring to its “plant-based, dairy-free” product as cheese. In an Instagram post, Blue Heron Creamery announced that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency warned that it cannot refer to its product as cheese “even if we identify it as plantbased, vegan, dairy free, use a hyphen or otherwise distinguish it from dairy.” In place of “cheese,” the company used the cheese emoji.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has announced public meetings to discuss proposed positions for the United States to take at various Codex Alimentarius Commissions. A meeting on general principles and procedures is scheduled for February 25, 2019, for the March Codex meeting in Bordeaux, France. The U.S. Codex Office will also host a public meeting on April 1, 2019, to discuss positions on contaminants in foods and a public meeting on May 6, 2019, to discuss methods of analysis.
The federal government has filed a statement of interest in a lawsuit alleging that Lenny & Larry’s Inc. misled consumers as to the amount of protein in its cookies. Cowen v. Lenny & Larry’s Inc., No. 17-1530 (N.D. Ill., E. Div., filed February 15, 2019). The statement argues that the settlement is a marketing opportunity for Lenny & Larry’s rather than a benefit for the consumer class.
The complaint also asserts that Cento’s “Find My Field” website feature—which allows consumers to enter a lot code found on the tomato can to view the field in which the tomatoes were grown—only retrieves four fields. “It is implausible that defendant can sell more San Marzano tomatoes than all other companies in the US, combined, and do so by cultivating only four fields,” the plaintiff alleges.
“It would not necessarily be misleading to grow tomatoes from San Marzano seeds and label them as ‘San Marzano’ tomatoes,” the complaint argues. “It is misleading to grow tomatoes that may or may not be from San Marzano seeds and represent them as being ‘certified.'” For allegations of negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, fraud and violations of New York consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, an injunction, damages and attorney’s fees.
Wendy’s International Inc. has settled two class actions alleging injuries stemming from a 2016 payment-system breach. Jackson v. Wendy’s Int’l Inc., No. 16-0210 (M.D. Fla., entered February 26, 2019); First Choice Fed. Credit Union v. Wendy’s Co., No. 16-0506 (W.D. Penn., entered February 26, 2019). A Florida federal court approved a $3.4 million settlement between a consumer class and the company, including $1.1 million in attorney’s fees. In Pennsylvania, a federal court granted preliminary approval to a settlement in a lawsuit brought by a class of financial institutions that reimbursed customers for fraudulent transactions. Wendy’s will pay $50 million under the settlement agreement.
A consumer has alleged that Snack Innovations Inc.’s Drizzilicious rice cakes are advertised as containing white chocolate but only contain “imitation flavoring.” Morrison v. Snack Innovations Inc., No. 19-1238 (S.D.N.Y., filed February 8, 2019). The complaint asserts that “white chocolate,” by U.S. regulations, contains cocoa butter, dairy ingredients and sweetener, including 20 percent cocoa butter and 3.5 percent milk fat by weight. “The imitation white chocolate in the Products do not have cocoa butter or milk fat as required, and instead have other cheap confectionary ingredients to imitate the taste of white chocolate.” The plaintiff alleges fraud and violations of New York consumer-protection statutes and seeks class certification, damages, corrective advertising and attorney’s fees.
The European Court of Justice’s Grand Chamber has ruled that halal beef cannot carry an EU organic logo if the cows were not stunned before they were slaughtered. Œuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs v. Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation, No. C-497/17 (E.C.J., entered February 26, 2019). The court compared an organic-labeling regulation requiring efforts to preserve animal welfare during the slaughtering process with a regulation allowing religious rituals during slaughter.
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that North Dallas Honey Co. sells its Nature Nate’s honey as “100% raw” but heats it to 120 degrees during bottling. Pierce v. N. Dallas Honey Co., No. 19-0410-B (N.D. Tex., Dallas Div., filed February 19, 2019). The plaintiff argues that heating honey to more than 105 degrees can cause “[m]ost or all of the enzymes” to be “lost” or “denatured.” The plaintiff cites the “international standard promulgated by Codex Alimentarius for honey” to argue that Nature Nate’s honey contains elevated values of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), which can indicate that “the honey has been heated enough to break down the enzymes contained in the honey.” The complaint further asserts that the honey product “is also not necessarily 100% honey” because some tested samples allegedly “showed that syrups had been added to the honey.” For allegations of negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and violations of state and federal consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks damages, class certification, attorney’s fees and costs.
The Nutrition Business Journal spoke to Shook Partner Cary Silverman on the rise of lawsuits stemming from “clean labels” listed on food products. While consumers may want easier-to-read labels, this shortened language may open the door to potential lawsuits.
Silverman, who co-authored the 2017 report “The Food Court: Trends in Food and Beverage Class Action Litigation,” for the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, says that transparency creates skepticism.
Silverman’s report, which was co-authored with Shook Partner Jim Muehlberger, found that 20 food-marketing class actions were filed in 2008, while 2015 and 2016 saw 425 active cases. Defense attorneys argue that many of the suits are baseless.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.