Current location:home page > Laws and regulations

Claims against Hershey were not barred by FDCA

admin2 weeks ago (05-19)Laws and regulations20
A federal court in California has rejected arguments by The Hershey Company that a plaintiff's claim…
A federal court in California has rejected arguments by The Hershey Company that a plaintiff's claims against the chocolate icon are preempted by U.S. law. A putative class action lawsuit filed by Leon Khasin has accused Hershey of engaging in misleading conduct by advertising and labeling products in violation of several California state laws.

Edward J. Davila, a federal judge for the Northern District of California in the San Jose division, ruled the claims were not barred by language in the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the 1990 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act.

Hershey relied on a provision that precludes enforcement of federal law other than by the U.S. government, and the company also pointed to a 2012 holding (Pom Wonderful LLC vs. Coca-Cola Co.) by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. But those arguments didn't persuade the court.

"In this case, Plaintiff has not brought suit to enforce the federal statute," the judge wrote. Instead, "Plaintiff's action is based on parallel state laws that mirror the relevant sections of the FDCA and the NLEA. Plaintiff's multiple claims are predicated upon state laws, such as the Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law, which prescribes labeling requirements that are similar, if not identical to, the requirements under FDCA and NLEA. In such cases, courts have refused to find that preemption precludes the private, state-based causes of action."

Davila also rejected Hershey's contention that Khasin lacked standing to bring the lawsuit, although his Nov. 9 ruling wasn't a total loss for Hershey. Some breach of warranty claims filed under state and federal laws were thrown out of the case.

Among some of the allegations in the lawsuit: that Hershey has made unlawful antioxidant claims, failed to abide by the standards of identities for its chocolate and cocoa products and neglected to use the common or usual names of ingredients on its product labels.

Related articles

QPMA responds to the new Canadian Food Guide

The Quebec Produce Marketing Association (QPMA) is pleased with the recommendations from the new Can…

DGFT extends ban on import of Chinese milk, milk products with melamine

The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Govern…

Revision of Specification Standards for Refreshing Beverage Water in Japan

On November 30, Japan's Ministry of Health, Welfare and Labor issued Notice No. 5 of 1130 on raw foo…

European Commission publishes draft to amend regulations on trans fats

The European Commission has published a draft Commission Regulation amending Annex III to Regulation…

Food Stamps Major Focus During Day 1 Of Farm Bill Conference

“A compromise may be brewing via tightening rules under which states can get waivers from work requi…

Review of the existing maximum residue levels for mandipropamid

     According to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA has reviewed the maximum residue l…