Two thousand twenty-three was no exception to the trend of recent years in the ever-increasing issuance of private enforcer-led Proposition 65 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”) to businesses allegedly selling consumer,...more
On March 4, 2021, we wrote about lawsuits concerning alleged high levels of heavy metals in baby foods (“Are Your Baby’s Strained Carrots Safe? Considerations for Manufacturers”). A precipitating factor was a staff report...more
Heavy metals, such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury, are present in baby foods produced by U.S. baby food manufacturers according to a report released in February by the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on...more
Two thousand twenty-one is off to a roaring start in California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) world. Prop. 65 plaintiff groups issued two hundred thirty-seven (237) total 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”), with a number...more
Twenty-twenty was an unprecedented year of crisis throughout the world with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Stay-at-home orders, quarantines, remote work, and Zoom-school did not slowdown Proposition 65 plaintiffs,...more
In November 2020, Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) plaintiff groups issued three hundred and fourteen (314) Prop. 65 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”). In these Notices, plaintiff groups allege that chemicals in foods and...more
October 2020 Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) claims were, once again, varied and abundant with respect to food and consumer product allegations. Plaintiff groups issued three hundred and thirty-three (333) total Prop. 65 60-Day...more
September 2020 Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) claims were, for the most part, “oldies but goodies.” Plaintiff groups issued three hundred and forty (340) total Prop. 65 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices), over two hundred...more
In July, citizen plaintiff enforcers of California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) continued to send hundreds of 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”), as they have during each month of 2020. These Notices challenge the...more
The COVID-19 world continues. And so does the world of California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”). Citizen Plaintiff groups have sent hundreds of 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”) during each month of the pandemic,...more
COVID-19, shelter-in-place orders and California court closures did not slow Proposition 65 plaintiff groups down in March. Plaintiff groups sent more Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) Notices of Violations (“Notices”) in March...more
California’s Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 – or “Prop. 65” – requires “clear and reasonable warnings” on consumer products (including foods) sold in California if use...more
A United States District Court (New Jersey) (“Court”) addressed in a September 17th Memorandum and Order Cross Motions for Summary Judgment involving a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) cost recover action. See...more
LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS & STANDARDS - DOJ Announces Guilty Plea in E. Coli Prosecution - The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced that Memet Beqiri had pleaded guilty to “a charge related to his meat...more
LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS & STANDARDS - Bipartisan Bill Introduced to Standardize Food Date Labels - U.S. Reps. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) have introduced the Food Date Labeling Act, which aims...more
LEGISLATION, REGULATIONS & STANDARDS - FDA Issues Warning Letter to CBD Co. for Unsubstantiated Claims - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a warning letter to Curaleaf Inc. for “illegally selling...more
FSMA, Prop. 65 and Supply Chain Issues Among Subjects of Food Law Conferenc - In-house and outside counsel joined representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Agriculture (USDA) and...more
On May 9, 2018, the Second Appellate District held in Charles et al. v. Sutter Home Winery, Inc., et al. that several winemakers that provided general Proposition 65 safe harbor warnings for alcoholic beverages on their...more
The California Court of Appeal recently handed a victory to winemakers, ruling that a specific Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) warning is not required regarding the presence of inorganic arsenic. The lawsuit, Charles et al. v....more
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has announced new food safety recommendations for managing the risk of arsenic in rice and efforts to reduce pathogens in meat and poultry products. Following a request to...more
Over the last few years, the Occupational and Health Administration (OSHA) has targeted indoor shooting ranges for potential exposures of employees to lead. During inspections, OSHA compliance officers generally take...more
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently proposed levels of inorganic arsenic in rice that would be deemed “naturally occurring” and thus exempt from the Proposition 65 warning...more
A recent CERCLA settlement provides an unusual method for reimbursing response costs incurred by EPA at a Superfund site. Under a proposed Consent Decree concerning the Yavapai Penta Superfund Site in Prescott, Arizona,...more
Scott Enters., Inc. v. City of Allentown, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1503 (Pa. July 19, 2016) - The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversed an order of the Commonwealth Court and held that the prompt payment provisions of the...more