Source: http://thefreshfactsblog.com/2012/06/
Timestamp: 2017-09-23 16:13:24
Document Index: 236792774

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46', '§ 46']

Jason Klinowski Presents at the 3rd Advanced Summit on Food Safety Regulatory Compliance | Food
Jason Klinowski Presents at the 3rd Advanced Summit on Food Safety Regulatory Compliance
Recently, I had the privilege of speaking at the American Conference Institute’s 3rd Advanced Summit on Food Safety Regulatory Compliance, which was held in Chicago, Illinois on June 26-27 2012. My presentation discussed: “How to Prepare and Implement Effective Remediation and Corrective Action Plans Post-Inspection.” Notable conference attendees included counsel and/or representatives from ConAgra Foods, H.J. Heinz Company, J.M. Smucker Company, Whole Foods Market and others. Freeborn & Peters LLP was a proud sponsor of this event.
My presentation provided a practitioner’s point of view (as outside general counsel to numerous food companies) on how to prepare a proper response to a FDA 483 Report of Investigation, which including drafting tips, best practices and response strategies. Following this same format, I also discussed how to prepare effective corrective action plans and reconditioning plans.
For those of you who may be interested, here is a link to my presentation:
Jason Klinowski’s – ACI Presentation
This entry was posted in Food Safety and tagged American Conference Institute, Corrective Action Plan, FDA 483, FDA attorney, FDA inspection, FDA lawyer, food attorney, food lawyer, Food Safety, Food Safety Modernization Act, Freeborn & Peters, FSMA, Jason Klinowski, produce attorney, produce law, produce lawyer, Reconditioning Plan, USDA attorney, USDA lawyer on June 28, 2012 by Jason Klinowski.
The FDA recently published information answering three frequently asked questions:
QUESTION: What form do I use to renew a food facility registration?
ANSWER: FDA Form 3537.
Registrants must use Form 3537 to register, update, or renew a registration. Form 3537 is being updated to meet registration renewal needs. The next registration renewal cycle begins October 1, 2012. Facilities may register online via the Internet at www.fda.gov/furls, which operates during business hours from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm U.S. Eastern Standard Time.
QUESTION: Am I required to renew a food facility registration online?
ANSWER: No! Registrants can renew food facility registrations online or submit the paper Form 3537 by mail or fax. A business with multiple facilities may also register on a CD-ROM by mail. FDA encourages online registration as the least costly, quickest, and most efficient means for food facility registration. With online registration, a food facility must enter all of the required information before the system will accept the submission. After all required information has been entered, a registrant will receive confirmation of registration and a registration number. Paper registration is a more costly and less efficient process to supply FDA with registration information and to provide food facilities with their registration numbers. Further, paper registration may have a higher number of errors or omissions on the form, which may require additional time to complete the registration process.
QUESTION: Why wait until October 1, 2012 to start the registration renewal process?
ANSWER: Because you will be required to do it again between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31, 2012. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) mandates that all food facilities that are required to register must renew their registrations every other year during the period beginning on October 1st and ending on December 31st of each even-numbered year. The first registration renewal cycle will occur from October 1 to December 31, 2012.
Please keep in mind that the FDA does not provide answers to questions of registration strategy, information disclosure and impact of registration choices on frequency of inspections and the classification of a food facility as high risk or non-high risk. These are ALL very important issues that need to be addressed.
This entry was posted in Food Safety Modernization Act and tagged FDA attorney, FDA lawyer, food attorney, food facility, food lawyer, Food Safety, Food Safety Modernization Act, Freeborn & Peters, FSMA, Jason Klinowski, produce attorney, produce law, produce lawyer, registration, USDA attorney, USDA lawyer on June 15, 2012 by Jason Klinowski.
On June 14, 2012, a civil action was filed in Indiana against Superior Supermarket I-IV each d/b/a Super-Max in an effort to collect approximately $48,300.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt.
On June 13, 2012, a civil action was filed in Florida against J.P. Imports, Inc. in an effort to collect approximately $21,000.00 in alleged PACA debt.
On June 13, 2012, a civil action was filed in the District of Columbia against E&C Foods, Inc. d/b/a Best World Supermarket a/k/a Best Way Supermarket in an effort to collect approximately $7,000.00 in alleged PACA debt.
On June 8, 2012, a civil action was filed in New Jersey against Del Monte Farms LLC in an effort to collect approximately $181,700.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt. The Court recently entered a Temporary Restraining Order in this case.
On June 8, 2012, a civil action was filed in Arizona against Fresh Touch Distributing, Inc. in an effort to collect approximately $45,800.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt.
On June 7, 2012, a civil action was filed in Massachusetts against Joseph Aiello and Sons, Inc. in an effort to collect approximately $24,200.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt.
Lastly, two new civil actions were filed in California against Patterson Vegetable Company LLC in an effort to collect upon more alleged PACA trust debt.
This entry was posted in PACA Trust Litigation Alerts and tagged Best Way Supermarket, Best World Supermarket, Del Monte Farms, E&C Foods, food attorney, food lawyer, Forever Green Food Group, Freeborn & Peters, Fresh Touch Distributing, J.P. Imports, Jason Klinowski, Joseph Aiello and Sons, PACA, PACA attorney, PACA Trust, PACA Trust Attorney, Patterson Vegetable Company, produce attorney, produce law, produce lawyer, Super-Max, Superior Supermarket, USDA attorney, USDA lawyer on June 15, 2012 by Jason Klinowski.
PACA Trust Perfection Formula for Grower/Grower Agent Relationships
One of the most misunderstood, or misused, sections of the Regulations governing the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (“PACA”) concern the appropriate time for Growers to receive the proper accountings and prompt payment under PACA. In my experience, few do it correctly and even fewer do it the same way twice. This is a dangerous practice for the Grower because the Grower is the one who bears the risk of waiving its PACA trust rights.
Time and time again, I see cases where a Grower will sit back and wait for its Grower’s Agent to provide an accounting of all the Produce delivered under the parties’ agreement. Once the Grower sees the accounting the Grower begins to look for payment and to calculate the reasonableness of the returns. The problem with this approach is that the Grower’s time to properly perfect its PACA trust rights begins to tick away without regard to whether the Grower’s Agent timely complies with the Regulations. To many Growers operate under the misconception that they are not able to invoice or otherwise perfect their trust rights in their Produce until they receive an accounting from the Grower’s Agent. This is WRONG! Let me show you why…
Grower means any person who raises produce for marketing. 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(p).
Growers’ agent means any person operating at shipping point who sells or distributes produce in commerce for or on behalf of growers or others and whose operations may include the planting, harvesting, grading, packing, and furnishing containers, supplies, or other services. 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(q).
Account promptly, except when otherwise specifically agreed upon by the parties, means rendering to the principal a true and correct accounting:
(2) In connection with consignment or joint account transactions, within 10 days after the date of final sale with respect to each shipment, or within 20 days from the date the goods are accepted at destination, whichever comes first: Provided, That whenever a grower’s agent or shipper distributes individual lots of produce for or on behalf of others, accounting to the principal shall be made within 30 days after receipt of the shipment from the principal for sale or within 5 days after the date the agent receives payment for the goods, whichever comes first. Whenever a grower’s agent or shipper harvests, packs, or distributes entire crops or multiple lots therefrom for or on behalf of others, an accounting on the initial shipment shall be rendered within 30 days after receipt of the goods for sale. Accountings for subsequent shipments shall be made at 10-day intervals from the date of the accounting for the initial shipment and a final accounting for the season shall be made to each principal within 30 days from the date the agent receives the last shipment for the season from that principal: Provided further, That whenever the marketing agreement between a principal and agent includes a provision for storage of goods prior to sale, the agent shall render accountings of inventory and expenses incurred to date at 30-day intervals from the date the goods are received by the agent until sales from storage begin, and Provided further, That nothing in the regulations in this part shall prohibit cooperative associations from accounting to their members on the basis of seasonal pools or other arrangements provided by their regulations or bylaws; and
7 C.F.R. § 46.2(z)(2).
Full payment promptly is the term used in the Act in specifying the period of time for making payment without committing a violation of the Act. “Full payment promptly,” for the purpose of determining violations of the Act, means:
(9) Whenever a grower’s agent or shipper harvests, packs, or distributes entire crops or multiple lots therefrom for or on behalf of others, payment for the initial shipment shall be made within 30 days after receipt of the goods for sale or within 5 days after the date the agent receives payment for the goods, whichever comes first. Payment for subsequent shipments shall be made at 10-day intervals from the date of the accounting for the initial shipment or within 5 days after the date the agent receives payment for the goods, whichever comes first, and final payment for the seasons shall be made to each principal within 30 days from the date the agent receives the last shipment for the season from that principal.
7 C.F.R. § 46.2(aa)(9).
Time to Perfect PACA Trust Rights:
Timely filing of a notice of intent to preserve benefits under the trust will be considered to have been made if written notice is given to the debtor within 30 calendar days:
(i) After expiration of the time prescribed by which payment must be made pursuant to regulation,
7 C.F.R. §46.46 (f)(2)(i).
Trust Perfection Formula for Grower/Grower Agent Relationship
The Regulations require a Grower’s Agent to “account promptly” to the Grower in compliance with 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(q)(2). The Regulations further required the Grower’s Agent to make “full payment promptly” to the Grower in compliance with 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(zz)(9).
Simply put, the Grower’s Agent must both account to and pay the Grower for the initial shipment of Produce within 30 days of the Grower’s Agent’s receipt of said Produce. The Regulations further require the Grower’s Agent to make additional prompt accountings on and payments for all subsequent shipments of Produce in 10-day intervals from the date of the Grower’s Agent’s accounting to the Grower for its receipt of the initial shipment of Produce. The Grower’s Agent shall make the final accounting and payment for the season to the Grower within 30 days from the date the Grower’s Agent receives the last shipment of Produce for the season from the Grower. 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(aa)(9).
Company’s Receipt of Initial Shipment + 30 Days = First Accounting & Payment Due
Date of First Account & Pay + 10 Days = First Interim Account & Pay
Date of First Interim Account & Pay + 10 Days = Second Interim Account & Pay….
Company’s Receipt of Last Shipment + 30 Days = Final Account & Pay
In light of the foregoing payment scheme, the Grower’s last day to timely perfect its PACA trust rights occur thirty (30) days after the expiration of the Grower’s Agent’s time to make full payment promptly under 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(aa)(9).
Key Initiating Dates:
The Grower’s Agent’s statutory obligations to both “account promptly” and to make “full payment promptly” begin on the date the Grower’s Agent first receives Produce from the Grower during a given season.
The Grower’s obligation to perfect its PACA Trust rights – or risk waiver – arises on the date the Grower receives the Grower’s Agent’s accountings under 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(q)(2) and ends thirty (30) days after the expiration of the Grower’s Agent’s last day to make a “full payment promptly” on a given accounting under 7 C.F.R. § 46.2(aa)(9).
Important Take Away:
The Grower’s deadline to timely perfect its PACA trust rights is capable of calculation without any action on the part of the Grower’s Agent. The Grower knows when it shipped Produce to the Grower’s Agent. These dates can be found on either the field pick tickets or the relevant bill of lading. Simply put, the Grower can calculate this date on its own and is responsible for doing so.
Because of this fact, a Grower cannot successfully recover money damages for unpaid Produce invoices under the PACA if it fails to timely perfect its trust rights. Equally important, Courts will not accept the fact that a Grower failed to timely perfect its PACA trust rights because the Grower’s Agent failed to provide the Grower with a timely accounting.
This entry was posted in Credit Management Tips and tagged food attorney, food lawyer, Freeborn & Peters, Grower, Grower's Agent, Jason Klinowski, PACA, PACA attorney, PACA Trust, PACA Trust Attorney, produce attorney, produce law, produce lawyer, USDA attorney, USDA lawyer on June 6, 2012 by Jason Klinowski.
On May 29, 2012, a civil action was filed in Chicago against CP No. 3, Inc. d/b/a Cermak Produce, DMM Produce, Inc. d/b/a Harvey Fresh Market, Mayfair Market Place, Inc. d/b/a Mayfair Market, Jenor LLC – Michael’s Fresh Market, Michael’s Market, Inc. and North Avenue Fresh Market LLC in an effort to collect approximately $1,9322,270.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt.
On May 29, 2012, a civil action was filed in Maryland against Tamburo, Inc. in an effort to collect approximately $23,500.00 in alleged PACA debt.
On May 31, 2012, a new civil action was filed in Washington against Seven Stars Fruit Company LLC in an effort to collect approximately $2,018,400.00 in alleged PACA debt.
On June 1, 2012, a civil action was filed in Chicago against A-1 Foodservice, Inc. and Forever Green Food Group, Inc. d/b/a Forever Green Foodservice in an effort to collect approximately $27,700.00 in an alleged PACA trust debt.
This entry was posted in PACA Trust Litigation Alerts and tagged A-1 Foodservice, Cermak Produce, CP No. 3, DMM Produce, food attorney, food lawyer, Forever Green Food Group, Forever Green Food Service, Freeborn & Peters, Harvey Fresh Market, Jason Klinowski, Jenor, Mayfair Market Place, Michael's Fresh Market, Michael's Market, North Avenue Fresh Market, PACA, PACA attorney, PACA Trust, PACA Trust Attorney, produce attorney, produce law, produce lawyer, seven stars fruit company, Tamburo, USDA attorney, USDA lawyer on June 4, 2012 by Jason Klinowski.