National Association of Wheat Growers, et al. v. Rob Bonta, -
No. 20-16758 (9th Cir.—November 7, 2023): The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor. The panel held...more
As 2022 drew to a close, the Wall Street Journal reported that the FDA is finally considering releasing potential guidance regarding cannabidiol (“CBD”) in the coming year. While the exact timeline and scope of the FDA’s...more
A California state appeals court affirmed a bong maker’s win in a suit alleging it violated California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) by failing to warn consumers that its products expose them to marijuana smoke that could cause...more
On March 19, 2021, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced proposed regulations that would significantly affect the warning requirements for products that cause exposure to cannabis...more
3/25/2021
/ Cancer ,
Cannabis Products ,
Comment Period ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
OEHHA ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Proposition 65 ,
Safe Drinking Water Act ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Chemicals ,
Toxic Exposure ,
Warning Labels
On January 8, 2021, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced proposed regulations that would significantly affect how businesses may use short-form Proposition 65 warnings. Proposition...more
1/14/2021
/ Consumer Product Companies ,
Distributors ,
Manufacturers ,
Notice and Comment ,
Notice Requirements ,
OEHHA ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Proposition 65 ,
State and Local Government ,
Toxic Chemicals ,
Toxic Exposure ,
Warning Labels
Proposition 65 warning requirements announced last year are set to be enforced starting January 3, 2021; if your business is selling cannabis products in California, now is the time to ensure that your labeling complies with...more
Welcome to the first in a multipart series of posts regarding California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65). This piece introduces readers to the law and its requirements. Future posts will dive deeper into analysis and trends...more
On July 15, 2020, a California state court made an important ruling upholding the validity and application of regulations exempting coffee from Proposition 65 warnings.
Better known as Proposition 65, the California’s...more
Perkins Coie is pleased to present its fourth annual Food Litigation Year in Review, summarizing important developments in consumer litigation affecting the food and beverage industry. Filings against the food and beverage...more
2/19/2020
/ Beverage Manufacturers ,
Cannabis Products ,
Class Action ,
Class Action Settlement ,
Dietary Supplements ,
False Advertising ,
First Amendment ,
Food Labeling ,
Food Manufacturers ,
Food Recalls ,
Grocery Stores ,
Misrepresentation ,
Multidistrict Litigation ,
Natural Products ,
Nutritional Supplements ,
OEHHA ,
Pets ,
Preemption ,
Proposition 65 ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Retailers ,
Slack-Fill Suits ,
Warning Labels
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol, better known as “THC,” to the list of chemicals requiring specific labeling for retail sale in California. Proposition 65,...more
2/15/2020
/ Cannabidiol (CBD) oil ,
Cannabis Products ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Manufacturers ,
Marijuana ,
OEHHA ,
Product Labels ,
Proposition 65 ,
Safe Drinking Water Act ,
Safe Harbors ,
Toxic Chemicals ,
Warning Labels
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued finalized amendments on January 14, 2020, to California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Better known as Proposition 65, the...more
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued finalized amendments on January 14, 2020, to California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Better known as Proposition 65, the...more