Lawsuits & Litigation | Food Safety News https://www.foodsafetynews.com/lawsuitslitigation/ Breaking news for everyone's consumption Tue, 15 Aug 2023 22:37:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.3.1&lxb_maple_bar_source=lxb_maple_bar_source https://www.foodsafetynews.com/files/2018/05/cropped-siteicon-32x32.png Lawsuits & Litigation | Food Safety News https://www.foodsafetynews.com/lawsuitslitigation/ 32 32 Salmonella in poultry issue isn’t going to be over until Marler says its over https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/salmonella-in-poultry-issue-isnt-going-to-be-over-until-marler-says-its-over/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/salmonella-in-poultry-issue-isnt-going-to-be-over-until-marler-says-its-over/#respond Tue, 15 Aug 2023 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=230934 In a kind of” twofer” Marler Clark, the Food Safety Law Firm, has provided USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service with more arguments on why certain Salmonella serotypes should be declared adulterants in meat. It’s a “twofer” because Marler Clark’s new comments were submitted under two dockets — the FSIS Salmonella in Certain Not-Ready-to-Eat Stuffed... Continue Reading

]]>
In a kind of” twofer” Marler Clark, the Food Safety Law Firm, has provided USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service with more arguments on why certain Salmonella serotypes should be declared adulterants in meat.

It’s a “twofer” because Marler Clark’s new comments were submitted under two dockets — the FSIS Salmonella in Certain Not-Ready-to-Eat Stuffed (NRTE) Chicken projects and the petition the Seattle law firm previously submitted calling for “Outbreak” Salmonella serotypes to be listed as adulterants. If a food is deemed adulterated it cannot be sold.

Salmonella is so frequently found in U.S. poultry that some food scientists say it is a biological hazard in consumers’ kitchens. FSIS denied Marler Clark’s 61-page petition to address all Outbreak strains. The petition was submitted on behalf of families damaged by Salmonella and several consumer organizations.

The new Marler Clark comments support FSIS’s proposal to regulate Salmonella at levels of 1 colony forming unit (CFU) in NRTE breaded stuffed chicken. It says, “we maintain that the Agency must adopt more robust measures to tackle the Salmonella problem effectively.”

“FSIS’s proposed determination on Salmonella in breaded stuffed chicken products was supported by various factors, one being the investigation of 14 Salmonella outbreaks and 200 illnesses linked to these products since 1998. But according to CDC, Salmonella bacteria cause a staggering 1.35 million illnesses, resulting in 26,500 hospitalizations and 420 deaths in the United States every year,” Marler Clark’s Aug. 14 letter says.

The new comments clarify that the law firm wants a response, not just a denial, to its previous petition. The petition was not an “all or nothing” request but presented 31 Salmonella serotypes that scientific fact or statutory law would justify adulterant status.

FSIS responded “in a serotype-specific” way for three serotypes, but the agenda was silent about the other 28. Marler Clark says denying its petition “was insufficient as a matter of law.”

FSIS said it could not “justify issuing the broad interpretive rule” that “would declare all Salmonella” as added substances in all products.

On behalf of its clients, Marler Clark may seek judicial review of the FSIS denial.   Marler Clark’s latest comments say an agency that is “incomplete and evasive” isn’t given deference during the review.

Marler Clark says the agency “primarily” used “straw-man” arguments in denying their petition. “Nothing in the Petition asserted that ‘grave health and safety problems’ posed by Salmonella in raw poultry or meat could not be addressed unless thirty-one serotypes were declared adulterant,” the Seattle law firm said.

It points out that FSIS’s data finds five stereotypes are responsible for 60 percent of USDA-regulated products.

USDA recognizes the Salmonella strains are “injurious to health,” but Marler Clark claims the FSIS “offered a laundry list of reasons not to regulate.”  “In the meantime, as the Agency hosts roundtables and ponders an ‘updated’ Salmonella strategy…necessary to reduce such illnesses,” the significant portion of the approximately 1.35 million cases of salmonella that occur each year.

The incidence of salmonellosis from poultry exceeds the CDC’s Healthy People 2030 objective of 11.5 cases per 100,000 population with no substantial deductions in two decades.

The Marler Clark comments conclude by saying “no reasonable interpretation” of FSIS regulations that do not require at least some Salmonella serotypes to be adulterants when present in specific quantities.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/salmonella-in-poultry-issue-isnt-going-to-be-over-until-marler-says-its-over/feed/ 0
Prison move temporarily cuts Michael Parnell’s ties with his lawyer during 11th Circuit action https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/prison-move-temporarily-cuts-michael-parnells-ties-with-his-lawyer-during-11th-circuit-action/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/prison-move-temporarily-cuts-michael-parnells-ties-with-his-lawyer-during-11th-circuit-action/#respond Tue, 01 Aug 2023 04:06:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=230422 Like former PCA President Stewart Parnell, Michael Parnell is before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta with a petition to vacate his conviction and sentence. Those petitions by the Parnell brothers have previously moved on similar tracks, but Michael’s appellate documents have been granted extended time for filing. Michael Parnell, the peanut broker... Continue Reading

]]>
Like former PCA President Stewart Parnell, Michael Parnell is before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta with a petition to vacate his conviction and sentence. Those petitions by the Parnell brothers have previously moved on similar tracks, but Michael’s appellate documents have been granted extended time for filing.

Michael Parnell, the peanut broker involved with the now-defunct Peanut Corporation of America, has been on the move this summer.

Broker Michael Parnell, 64, and his brother Stewart Parnell, 69, were the top executives at PCA when in 2008-09, its peanut processing plant in Georgia was found to be the source of a multiple state Salmonella outbreak that sickened thousands and resulted in several deaths. PCA’s peanut butter and paste recall was among the largest in history, involving more than 3,000 products.

What’s currently occurring is that the Bureau of Prisons decided this would be a good time to move Michael Parnell down the I-95 S/I 85 S corridor from his previous incarceration at Fort Dix, NJ, to Butner, NC, outside Raleigh. In mid-July, however, BOP opted to park Michael Parnell in Philadelphia, just 50 miles from  Fort Dix.

For Michael Parnell, the move came with at least a couple of advantages. He is assigned to low security, and the North Carolina prison includes BOP’s largest medical complex.  It is known for its oncology and behavioral sciences; The Federal Medical Center serves inmates from all security levels with health issues.

At age 64, Parnell has raised health issues by suggesting he should be the subject of a “compassionate release.” Parnell will be among 958 low-security inmates at Butner.  It houses a total of about 5,000 inmates.

That caused some confusion on the part of Parnell’s appellant attorney, Elliott M Harding of Charlottesville, VA, who was not sure where his client was. He sought the Court’s understanding and time extension.

Harding has filed transcripts from the District Court proceedings and its list of interested parties for the appeal.  

In His Habeas Corpus petition, Stwart Parnell has already won appealability grounds and filed his appellate brief. And  Stewart Parnell has not been moved from his place of incarceration in West Virginia.

The Parnell brothers were convicted by an Albany, GA, jury in 2014 for multiple felony counts associated with the multistate salmonella outbreak.

After jury conviction, they were sentenced to federal imprisonment — 28 years for Stewart and 20 years for Michael. Their convictions and sentences were upheld by the 11th Circuit in 2018.

Both federal inmates were eligible to file federal Herbs Corpus petition 2255 Motions in 2019. Hearings were held before the federal Magistrate judge for the Middle District of Georgia, but rulings went against the brothers at the District Court.

The 11th Circuit allowed Stewart Parnell to proceed with appealability on two issues: jury prejudice and ineffective assistance.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/08/prison-move-temporarily-cuts-michael-parnells-ties-with-his-lawyer-during-11th-circuit-action/feed/ 0
Food safety scores a win in recent water settlements https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/07/food-safety-scores-a-win-in-recent-water-settlement/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/07/food-safety-scores-a-win-in-recent-water-settlement/#respond Mon, 03 Jul 2023 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=229375 Food safety and clean water always make for a good marriage. That can be seen in a recent legal settlement involving two large dairies in Eastern Washington that were accused of contaminating the water and soil in the area. The goal of the settlement is to stop the animal waste from the dairies from polluting... Continue Reading

]]>
Food safety and clean water always make for a good marriage. That can be seen in a recent legal settlement involving two large dairies in Eastern Washington that were accused of contaminating the water and soil in the area. The goal of the settlement is to stop the animal waste from the dairies from polluting the local drinking water and harming the environment.

Three environmental groups, CARE, Friends of Toppenish Creek, and the Center for Food Safety, took it upon themselves to tell the court that this mishandling of animal waste and over-application on fields as fertilizer is contributing to high levels of nitrates in groundwater, which in turn affects people’s wells. 

The decree requires the dairies to upgrade the way they manage their manure, help restore the aquifer by remediating nitrate and ammonia contamination beneath the dairies’ lagoons, and fund research to compare two remediation methods that focus on shallow aquifers beneath porous soils.

This is not an isolated case. This spring, six residents from Eastern Oregon, along with members from Oregon Rural Action, went to the state Capitol to ask the governor for a specific plan to stop nitrate contamination. Their concern is that the groundwater in the area, which includes Morrow and Umatilla counties, has suffered from nitrate pollution for more than 30 years. And they pointed out that groundwater is the main source of drinking water in the region. They have demanded that the governor declare a public health emergency in the region. As in the case in Washington state, manure from mega-dairies and how it is handled is the problem.

Manure and more manure

Together the two diaries in Eastern Washington have 5,800 cows. That adds up to a lot of manure because a mature dairy cow can generate anywhere from 65 to 120 pounds of manure a day. 

Large dairies typically have manure lagoons, where they dump the dairy waste and pull it out when the lagoons reach a certain level. That manure slurry is typically applied to the land as a form of fertilizer. The problem with the lagoons is that the leakage of millions of gallons of manure from the storage ponds can lead to nitrates and phosphorus contamination of groundwater and drinking water.

In the settlement, the dairies are required to double the linings in the lagoons or close them, install more than a dozen groundwater monitoring wells, improve land application of dairy waste to avoid further contamination and participate in a pilot project set up to extract nitrates from area groundwater.

“We now have a plan to stop future pollution and clean up the existing pollution,” said Helen Reddout, president and co-founder of Care. “It’s about time.”

Time comes into the picture.

“The remedial measures to be undertaken should speed clean-up of the groundwater by a decade or more said Charlie Tebbutt, lead counsel for the community groups and an attorney for CARE for 25 years. “The community deserves better protection that what the state has provided, which has been virtually nothing.”

He said that once again, the people had to use the federal environmental laws to protect themselves from rampant pollution.

“The rest of the dairy industry needs to follow suit.”

How bad was it?

CARE’s Helen Reddout, a determined 93 years old, said that the nitrate levels in the tap water were so bad that doctors were telling people not to touch the water— not even when they were washing their hands under running water.

“You can’t see it, smell it or taste it,” she said. “But it can cause serious health problems.”

As part of the settlement, the dairies will fund alternative sources of clean drinking water for people who live near the dairy operations. 

Another concern in all of this are the many farmworkers who work in the valley. 

With all the persistent pushing for improvements that her group and others did, Reddout said the dairy owners actually became more aware of the problem.

“When we first started, you’d see black manure coming out of the dairy pipes and going into the creeks.” she said. “ The dairy owners would say, ‘‘Once it’s off my property, it’s not my problem.’”

CARE’s Helen Reddout, a determined 93-year-old, said that the nitrate levels in the tap water were so bad that doctors were telling people not to touch the water— not even when they were washing their hands under running water.

Then, you’d also see manure slurry flowing out of the barns and into the road ditches that led to the creeks.

And the smell, it was awful she said. “So awful that you couldn’t keep an air conditioner going. And you didn’t even want to go outside in the summer.”

“It tore up my life,” she said, explaining that she had wanted to have a nursery where people could come out and buy flowers and plants. “No one would want to come out to a place that smelled so bad,” she said.

Then there’s food safety

Amy van Saun, an attorney with the Center for Food Safety, said that mega-dairies are problematic for food safety in several ways. 

“First, they generate a massive quantity of waste, which contains not just nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus, but also pathogens like E coli, animal drug residues, and heavy metals,” she said. “That waste is then spread on crop fields, some of which feed the cattle, but others are crops we directly eat, including some that are certified organic. They also contaminate surface and groundwater that is used for drinking water and to irrigate crops.”

She also said that many of the outbreaks of pathogens on lettuce and spinach and other crops like that are tied to nearby spraying of waste or contaminated irrigation water from large animal operations. 

“By getting these mega-dairies under a consent decree, they will be required to better manage their waste to avoid that ground and surface water contamination, and be more careful about what they’re spraying on crops,” she said. 

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/07/food-safety-scores-a-win-in-recent-water-settlement/feed/ 0
Two Michael Parnell motions were denied by the federal court https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/two-michael-parnell-motions-were-denied-by-the-federal-court/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/two-michael-parnell-motions-were-denied-by-the-federal-court/#respond Tue, 25 Apr 2023 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=226884 Now on senior status, Federal Judge W. Louis Sands presided over the 2014 criminal trial of Peanut Corporation of American executives. And in new rulings, Sands has said “No” and “No” again to defendant Michael Parnell, who was seeking both “compassionate release” and the dismissal of his conviction on constitutional grounds. It means defeat for... Continue Reading

]]>
Now on senior status, Federal Judge W. Louis Sands presided over the 2014 criminal trial of Peanut Corporation of American executives. And in new rulings, Sands has said “No” and “No” again to defendant Michael Parnell, who was seeking both “compassionate release” and the dismissal of his conviction on constitutional grounds.

It means defeat for the 64-year-old Parnell, who was a peanut broker for PCA when its Blakely, GA, peanut processing plant was found to be the source of a deadly multistate Salmonella outbreak. He is currently an inmate at the Fort Dix, NJ, federal prison, serving a 20-year sentence.

In a motion originally filed in February 2021, Parnell requested “the Court to reduce and suspend the remaining term of incarceration so that he could be placed on home electronic surveillance at his residence in Virginia for a time deemed reasonable by the Court and then placed on supervised probation for the duration.”

Parnell was indicted on Feb. 15, 2013, for alleged conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud, conspiracy to introduce adulterated food into interstate commerce, conspiracy to introduce misbranded food into interstate commerce, the introduction of adulterated and misbranded food into interstate commerce with intent to defraud or mislead, interstate shipments fraud, wire fraud, and obstruction of justice.

In September 2014, after a seven-week jury trial, Parnell was found guilty of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud, conspiracy to introduce adulterated and misbranded food into interstate commerce with intent to defraud or mislead, along with multiple counts of introduction of misbranded food into interstate commerce, multiple counts of mail fraud, and multiple counts of wire fraud.

He was acquitted of all counts that charged him with the introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce. He was sentenced to 240 months imprisonment to be followed by three years of supervised release. The sentence was upheld on appeal by the 11th Federal Circuit Court in Atlanta.

In filing for compassionate release in 2021, Parnell said there were “extraordinary and compelling reasons” including the fact that he is 61 years old, is overweight, and is suffering from chronic debilitating illnesses, including Type-2 diabetes and hypertension.

He further argued that “FCI Fort Dix, the federal correctional institution where Defendant is currently housed, has contracted COVID-19, and the safety plan provided by the Bureau of Prisons is ‘virtually impossible’ to adhere to because of narrow hallways that make social distancing impracticable and the facility’s poor air circulation.”

Sands obtained Parnell’s medical records through the U.S. Probation Office and upon review found “no extraordinary or compelling reason that warrants compassionate release.” He said Parnell “asserts medical reasons, such as being clinically overweight, having Type II diabetes and hypertension. But under the governing policy statement, the only medical conditions that rise to the level of extraordinary and compelling reasons are those that (i) are terminal illnesses or (ii) “substantially diminish the ability of the defendant to provide self-care” within the prison.

Sands said he “agrees with the Government that merely pointing to the existence of his medical conditions is insufficient” because Parnell “did not demonstrate how his conditions are not being adequately treated or controlled or that his ability to provide self-care in prison is substantially diminished as a result of his medical conditions.”

The U.S. Probation Office said Parnell gets “prescribed various medications for his hypertension, diabetes, and liver disease.” He has also received Covid 19 vaccines.

“After a careful and complete review of the record, motion, and response, the applicable factors under § 3553(a), and the relevant policy statements under the Sentencing Commission, Defendant’s Motion for Compassionate Release is DENIED,” Sands ruled.

MOTION 2255
After holding hearings, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff previously found that Parnell failed to establish evidence that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, and therefore recommended against the 2255 Moton to vacate the conviction and sentence.

The Langstaff report went to Sands for his either acceptance or rejection, and he completely endorses the magistrate’s findings and denial of Parnell’s motion.

Parnell and his brother Stewart Parnell, the former president of the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA). were among those indicted over a 2008-09 Salmonella outbreak.

Michael Parnell managed PCA’s sale of peanut paste to the Kellogg Company. Until its demise in 2009, PCA made and sold peanut products to food producers across the United States.

Federal authorities identified PCA’s production plant in Blakely, Georgia, as the source of a nationwide salmonella outbreak. Following a four-year investigation, the Parnell brothers were indicted for their conduct regarding food safety at PCA

Here’s how Sands remembers what went down:

“At trial, the Government presented evidence that Petitioner Michael Parnell, and his brother and Co-Defendant Stewart, conspired with senior management at PCA to defraud its customers regarding the safety of its products.

“At Stewart Parnell’s direction, PCA re-tested product that tested positive for salmonella until it obtained a negative result, or shipped product before receiving the test results on that product, and even shipped product after receiving positive test results. The Government also presented evidence regarding a scheme that Stewart, Michael, and other senior management designed to help PCA meet production demands for Kellogg’s account. In September 2007.

“PCA started assigning future lot numbers to samples of peanut paste that it sent for testing. It used those test results to create Certificates of Analysis for new lots of peanut paste that it shipped to Kellogg’s. The Certificate of Analysis for Kellogg’s orders contained test results for a sample pulled from a previous lot. The lot that was shipped had not been tested. PCA took samples from the new lot, assigned future lot numbers to those samples, and sent them for testing to keep the practice going. PCA did not inform Kellogg’s if test results for a lot that had already shipped came back positive.

 Between January 2008 and January 2009, more than 60 percent of paste lots for Kellogg’s had not undergone any microbiological testing. Petitioner Michael Parnell, along with other Co-Defendants, knew that PCA had received positive salmonella test results before the salmonella outbreak. But they were not forthcoming with the FDA during its investigation.”

Michael Parnell filed his 2255 Motion to Vacate on March 5, 2019. It is sometimes referred to as a Habeus Corpus motion. Stewart Parnell’s 2255 motion, also filed in 2019, was also turned down by Sands and is currently on appeal in the federal court’s 11th Circuit

Michael Parnell argued, “that his trial counsel, Mr. Ed Tolley, provided ineffective assistance by (1) failing to move for a change of venue, (2) failing to strike jurors for cause who knew about allegations of death resulting from the salmonella outbreak, (3) failing to investigate witnesses that were made known to counsel and would have materially discredited Government’s key witnesses, and (4) failing to investigate after discovering jurors were potentially influenced by out-of-court information.”

Sands found those ” objections to be without merit”

Thousands were sickened with Salmonella because PCA peanut butter and peanut paste were contaminated in 2008-09, and there were nine deaths associated with the outbreak. 

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/two-michael-parnell-motions-were-denied-by-the-federal-court/feed/ 0
Nestlé to compensate victims of E. coli outbreak https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/nestle-to-compensate-victims-in-e-coli-outbreak/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/nestle-to-compensate-victims-in-e-coli-outbreak/#respond Wed, 19 Apr 2023 04:01:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=226676 Nestlé France has agreed to a compensation package for people affected in a 2022 E. coli outbreak. The agreement between the company and the families of victims was signed at the end of March. The amount has not been made public. A civil hearing was set to take place in May but has now been... Continue Reading

]]>
Nestlé France has agreed to a compensation package for people affected in a 2022 E. coli outbreak.

The agreement between the company and the families of victims was signed at the end of March. The amount has not been made public.

A civil hearing was set to take place in May but has now been canceled. The criminal inquiry into the incident is ongoing.

A total of 56 confirmed and two probable cases with a median age of 6 were sick in the outbreak between mid-January and April 2022 because of contaminated frozen Buitoni Fraîch’Up pizzas. It was the largest E. coli-HUS outbreak ever documented in France. 

There were 50 cases of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS), two children died and two others had severe complications. HUS is a type of kidney failure associated with E. coli infections that can result in serious health problems.

Patients were positive for Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) O26:H11 or O103:H2. Only two people were sick from E. coli O103, according to Santé publique France, the country’s public health agency. 

STEC O26:H11 and O103:H2 outbreak strains were isolated from pizzas sampled in patients’ homes and at the manufacturing plant. E. coli was also found in the flour used to make pizzas.

Deal reached
“Each claimant will receive an equitable compensation proposal from Nestlé France, subject to a medical assessment that takes into consideration the seriousness of the damage and each situation,” said a Nestlé statement.

“We remain open to listening to them and intend to support them. Rest assured: We take our responsibilities seriously, and we are working hard to ensure that something like this never happens again.

“In the context of the ongoing criminal proceedings, Nestlé France is collaborating with the judicial authorities. It is important for everyone that justice sheds light on what happened, and whatever the outcome, the company will fully assume its responsibilities.”

Lawyer Pierre Debuisson, who represents 63 alleged victims, had initially requested compensation of up to €250 million ($274 million) for his clients.

In late March 2023, Nestlé decided to shut down the factory in Caudry, France, that produced contaminated pizzas. The decision followed a suspension of operations because of a decline in pizza order forecasts. 

In March 2022, Nestlé recalled and withdrew the incriminated pizzas, and production at the site was suspended. 

In December, Nestlé was allowed to reopen the plant partially. Approval covered the production of pizzas with cooked dough. The line making pizzas with no rebaking of dough, such as the Fraîch’Up range, was not restarted. 

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/nestle-to-compensate-victims-in-e-coli-outbreak/feed/ 0
Publisher’s Platform: ‘Poisoned’ scheduled on Netflix in June and the mystery missing updates https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/publishers-platform-poisoned-scheduled-on-netflix-in-june-and-the-mystery-missing-updates/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/publishers-platform-poisoned-scheduled-on-netflix-in-june-and-the-mystery-missing-updates/#respond Thu, 13 Apr 2023 04:06:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=226508 Well, rumor has it that the documentary version of the story of the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak will be out in June 2023. When all thought it would go to the “silver screen” in January there was a rush to reprint the book. Here are a few pages that made it... Continue Reading

]]>
Well, rumor has it that the documentary version of the story of the 1993 Jack in the Box E. coli outbreak will be out in June 2023. When all thought it would go to the “silver screen” in January there was a rush to reprint the book.

Here are a few pages that made it into the first paperback version, but not the current one:

Click on book pages to enlarge.

Here is the latest update that also did not make it:

October 11, 2022

Just over 20 years after Bill penned an Op-ed for the Denver Post in which he challenged the USDA/FSIS and the Beef Industry to “Put me out of Business,” E. coli cases linked to ground beef have nearly, but not completely, disappeared. As Bill tells it, “I could count on a significant E. coli outbreak and recall occurring like clockwork nearly every Spring or Summer. When 2003 came, there were no outbreaks, and other than the tragic uptick in 2007 that impacted Stephanie Smith, E. coli cases linked to ground beef are no longer a part of the work we do anymore.  The industry to its credit did its job and met my challenge.”

Since the 2018 E. coli outbreak linked to Romaine lettuce from Yuma, E. coliSalmonellaListeria, and hepatitis A outbreaks linked to fresh fruits and vegetables now take up the bulk of Bill’s attention.  Romaine lettuce E. coli outbreaks have now replaced ground beef as the staple of the Marler Clark practice.

In 2019 Bill launched a petition to ban Salmonella from chicken like E. coli were banned from ground beef.  Thus far the USDA/FSIS has resisted, but it has banned Salmonella from certain chicken products.  As Bill says, “A win is a win, even if a small one.”

The COVID-19 Pandemic may have slowed Bill’s world-wide travel schedule, but it barely impacted reported foodborne outbreaks and the litigation that surrounds them.  Salmonella-tainted onions in 2020 and 2021 sickened thousands in the United States and Canada.  Salmonella-laced ground turkey sickened dozens, organic yogurt nearly caused the death of three children with E. coli-mediated HUS in 2021.  Hepatitis A outbreaks linked to ill workers in multiple restaurants (Bill has for decades urged the restaurant industry to offer hepatitis A vaccines to employees) in New Jersey and Virginia sickened nearly 100, causing five deaths and three liver transplants.  In 2022, a Salmonella outbreak hit peanut butter, again, and Listeria in ice cream raised its deadly head.

2022 has also put social media and “influencers” from Instagram and TikTok on the same footing as CDC epidemiologists.  Public health officials seemed completely oblivious to hundreds of people suffering with acute liver failure after consuming an organic, vegan home-delivered food produced by a company backed by the power of Serena Williams and Gwyneth Paltrow.  Bill now represents 361 of the customers in a Federal Court lawsuit that stretches from New York City to the mountains of Peru.

The pandemic years have turned Bill into nearly a “virtual” lawyer.  Instead of crisscrossing the world to appear in Court or to give a speech on “why it is a bad idea to poison your customers,” Bill will log in to his custom-built studio from his Bainbridge Island satellite office.  The pandemic has also ushered in other changes at Marler Clark, with three of the four founding partners retiring.  Bruce Clark, Denis Stearns and Andy Weisbecker have opted for a bit slower pace out of Bill’s wake.

Bill when asked when he might retire as well, quickly responds, “I still have much to do. I still love helping people and trying to do my part to make sure there are fewer Bri’s in the future than in the past or the present.” 

Well, perhaps the next version.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/publishers-platform-poisoned-scheduled-on-netflix-in-june-and-the-mystery-missing-updates/feed/ 0
Federal Judge blocks break for medium-sized factory farms https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/federal-judge-blocks-break-for-medium-sized-factory-farms/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/federal-judge-blocks-break-for-medium-sized-factory-farms/#respond Thu, 06 Apr 2023 04:04:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=226237 USDA’s Farm Service Agency makes loans to family farms that are categorically exempt (“CatEx”) from the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), which permits agencies to make such exemptions. Since 2016, the FSA has extended that exemption for loan actions to medium-sized “concentrated animal feeding operations” (“CAFOs”). But in a “down in the weeds” ruling, a... Continue Reading

]]>
USDA’s Farm Service Agency makes loans to family farms that are categorically exempt (“CatEx”) from the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), which permits agencies to make such exemptions.

Since 2016, the FSA has extended that exemption for loan actions to medium-sized “concentrated animal feeding operations” (“CAFOs”).

But in a “down in the weeds” ruling, a federal court has ordered FSA to again assess the environmental impact of medium-sized CAFOs before extending them credit.

“Plaintiffs argue that this rule was arbitrary and/or capricious and should be vacated pending remand. Defendants agree that the rule is procedurally infirm, but argue that the agency error was so minor that the Court should remand the rule to the agency without vacating it,” Federal District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said in her ruling.

She said the court “concludes that the Plaintiffs have the better of the argument and, upon consideration of the pleadings, the relevant legal authorities, and the entire record.” She denied FSA’s motion for Voluntary Remand and granted the Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.

Plaintiffs are led by Dakota Rural Action.

The judge’s ruling explains that: “Here, FSA concluded that it need not employ any environmental analysis before taking certain loan actions to benefit medium-sized CAFOs. CAFOs are industrial operations that raise animals for harvest, including slaughter.”

“These businesses, some of which are family-owned, “raise animals in a confined situation for a total of 45 days or more during a 12-month period and bring feed to the animals rather than having the animals graze or seek feed in pastures and fields or on rangeland.” Id. “The byproducts of these operations may have environmental consequences.” the ruling continues “Among other things, FSA provides certain loan services to CAFOs.  At issue here are loans to ‘medium’ CAFOs, which ‘stable or confine’ (1) ‘200 to 699 mature dairy cows, whether milked or dry;’ (2) ‘300 to 999 veal calves;’ (3) ‘300 to 99 cattle,’ and (4) ‘37,500 to 124,999 chickens;’ among other categories of animals.”

The ruling by the D.C. district judge makes no mention of the economic impact, including shortages and price increases that might result from the newly added environmental hurdles.

“Today in a victory for rural community, sustainable agriculture, and animal welfare groups, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the United States Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) must assess the environmental impact of medium-sized concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) before extending loans to them.” the Public Justice Food Project’s victory statement said.

In 2016, the FSA passed a rule exempting medium-sized CAFOs, also known as factory farms, from the environmental impact review and community feedback process typically required before offering taxpayer-subsidized loans to such facilities. This carveout harmed communities living near such “medium-sized” CAFOs, which are industrial livestock facilities that can confine up to 125,000 chickens, 55,000 turkeys, 2,500 pigs, 1,000 beef cattle, or 700 dairy cows, subjecting neighboring communities to pervasive odors, noxious gasses, polluted waterways, and more, according to advocates for controls.

A coalition of groups sued USDA in 2019 for failing to provide adequate public notice or evidence-based justification for the exemption. The Plaintiffs argued that USDA violated the National Environmental Policy Act and Administrative Procedure Act.

They claimed USDA arbitrarily exempted major polluters from government oversight, and that medium-sized CAFOs must be subjected to the same oversight as large ones before receiving public funds.

Animal Legal Defense Fund, Association of Irritated Residents, Citizens Action Coalition, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, and Food & Water Watch are represented by ALDF.

Public Justice, Food & Water Watch, Dakota Rural Action and White River Waterkeeper are represented by Public Justice and Food & Water Watch.

“Our government has a duty to protect and invest in the health and wellbeing of people, our air, our water, and climate,” said Co-Chair of Dakota Rural Action Stacy Roberts, “Instead of propping up Big Ag, our government should invest in diversifying and strengthening a food system that supports independent family farmers, contributes to local communities, and heals the land, air, and water.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/04/federal-judge-blocks-break-for-medium-sized-factory-farms/feed/ 0
Food safety settlement entered in the federal case against Honey Smacks producer https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/02/largest-food-safety-settlement-entered-in-federal-case-against-honey-smacks/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/02/largest-food-safety-settlement-entered-in-federal-case-against-honey-smacks/#respond Fri, 03 Feb 2023 21:49:45 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=223972 In one of the largest ever food safety fine and forfeiture case a producer of Honey Smacks cereal pleaded guilty to operating in unsanitary conditions that resulted in an outbreak of Salmonella infections. The $19.2 million payment is part of a federal plea agreement with food and ingredient manufacturing company Kerry Inc., according to an... Continue Reading

]]>
In one of the largest ever food safety fine and forfeiture case a producer of Honey Smacks cereal pleaded guilty to operating in unsanitary conditions that resulted in an outbreak of Salmonella infections.

The $19.2 million payment is part of a federal plea agreement with food and ingredient manufacturing company Kerry Inc., according to an announcement from the U.S. Department of Justice. The department reported that it is the largest such settlement in a food safety case. Kerry is scheduled to be sentenced on March 14.

The 2018 outbreak sickened at least 135 people according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. No one died, but 34 people had to be hospitalized. The outbreak spanned 36 states. The outbreak was determined to be over in September 2018. The CDC reported that many more people were likely sickened in the outbreak because of the conditions at the plant being multi-year and some people probably did not seek treatment for illnesses.

In June 2018 the Kellogg’s Company recalled all Honey Smacks cereal made from 2017 forward.

“Laboratory testing identified the outbreak strain of Salmonella Mbandaka in a sample of unopened Kellogg’s Honey Smacks cereal collected from a retail location in California,” according to the CDC. “Laboratory testing also identified the outbreak strain in samples of leftover Kellogg’s Honey Smacks cereal collected from the homes of ill people in Montana, New York, and Utah.”

Documents unsealed today revealed that Salmonella had been found on an ongoing basis at the Kerry manufacturing plant in Gridley, IL. During the time period June 2016 to June 2018, routine environmental tests detected Salmonella in the plant 81 times, including at least one positive Salmonella sample each month.

According to the plea agreement with the company, employees at the Gridley facility routinely failed to implement corrective and preventative actions to address positive Salmonella tests.

In a related case, Ravi K. Chermala, Kerry’s Director of Quality Assurance until September 2018, previously pleaded guilty to three federal misdemeanor counts of causing the introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce. Chermala oversaw the sanitation programs at various Kerry manufacturing plants, including the Gridley facility. 

“In pleading guilty, Chermala admitted that between June 2016 and June 2018, he directed subordinates not to report certain information to Kellogg’s about conditions at the Gridley facility,” according to the Justice Department.

“In addition, Chermala admitted that he directed subordinates at the Gridley facility to alter the plant’s program for monitoring for the presence of pathogens in the plant, limiting the facility’s ability to accurately detect insanitary conditions. Chermala is scheduled to be sentenced on Feb. 16.”

The Food and Drug Administration is continuing to investigate the situation and may forward additional information to the Justice Department seeking action against additional individuals or the Kellogg’s Company.

Assistant Commissioner Justin D. Green for the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations said: “We will continue to pursue and bring to justice those who put the public health at risk by allowing contaminated foods to enter the U.S. marketplace.”

The Justice Department’s Senior Trial Attorney James T. Nelson of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch is prosecuting the case. Former Trial Attorney Cody Matthew Herche and Associate Chief Counsel Jason Hadges of FDA’s Office of Chief Counsel provided substantial assistance.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/02/largest-food-safety-settlement-entered-in-federal-case-against-honey-smacks/feed/ 0
Judge grants $4 million in wrongful death suit against Big Olaf Creamery https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/01/judge-grants-4-million-in-wrongful-death-suit-against-big-olaf-creamery/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/01/judge-grants-4-million-in-wrongful-death-suit-against-big-olaf-creamery/#respond Wed, 25 Jan 2023 01:34:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=223553 The husband of a woman who died from a Listeria infection from eating ice cream made by Big Olaf Creamery has been awarded $4 million in damages. The victim, Mary Katherine Billman, was the primary caretaker of her husband Richard Billman who suffers from dementia and other health problems.  Mary, 79, was visiting her daughter... Continue Reading

]]>
The husband of a woman who died from a Listeria infection from eating ice cream made by Big Olaf Creamery has been awarded $4 million in damages.

The victim, Mary Katherine Billman, was the primary caretaker of her husband Richard Billman who suffers from dementia and other health problems. 

Mary, 79, was visiting her daughter in Florida in January of 2022 and ate ice cream from Big Olaf on Jan. 18. She was dead in less than two weeks.

“Unaware of the threat growing silently within her body, it was too late to save her life by the time Mary developed the signs and symptoms of the infection that was about to make her gravely ill. Less than two weeks after ingesting the ice cream, Mary Billman was dead,” states the wrongful death lawsuit filed in federal court in Florida.

The $4 million damage award, which includes $1 million in punitive damages, was decided by Judge William F. Jung following an Evidentiary Hearing on Jan. 20, 2023. It was entered against Big Olaf Creamery LLC of Sarasota, FL. 

Mary died on Jan. 29, 2022. She is survived by her husband Richard Billman, three daughters, Richelle Brown, Kelli Mitsdarfer, and Kara Gray, eight grandchildren and four great-grandchildren.

Her husband and daughter Richelle were holding her hands when she died after being treated in the emergency room at Memorial Regional Hospital South in Hollywood, FL, for three days. No ICU beds were available.

“Those days and that day have haunted me since then and will haunt me forever. To now know that my family gave her the ice cream that killed her is almost too much to bear. I also know more about Listeria and am more aware of the pain and suffering she was going through while in the ER. We unnecessarily lost the bright light of love and positivity that was my mom. The pain and sadness are overwhelming,” Richelle is quoted as saying after her mother’s death.

Richard Billman incurred $89,689 in medical expenses from Memorial Regional Hospital South. He also incurred $1,220 in expenses for the cremation of Mary.

The punitive damages were sought because the Big Olaf Creamery “engaged in conduct that so reckless and wanting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard or indifference to the life, health and safety of individuals,” according to Richard Billman’s lawsuit.

The outbreak

Mary was one of 28 people from 11 states who developed Listeria infections. Of them, 27 required hospitalization. 

Mary was the only patient to die. Seven illnesses were among pregnant people or newborns. One illness resulted in pregnancy loss, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Sick people’s samples were collected from Jan. 24, 2021, to Aug. 19, 2022. Patients ranged in age from less than 1 to 92 years. Half of them were female.

Samples from sick people showed a common strain of Listeria monocytogenes. That same strain was found on equipment at the Big Olaf production facility and in its ice cream.

Big Olaf first refused to recognize that it was the cause of the outbreak and refused to stop production and stop ice cream sales.

The investigation

State officials with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services began investigating the outbreak in the spring of 2022. They performed whole genome sequencing on samples of ice cream and equipment and found the outbreak strain of Listeria.

The pathogen was found in 10 environmental. Samples from the production facility and in 16 of 17 flavors of Big Olaf ice cream. Eventually, the state shut down the operation.

On July 2, 2022, the federal CDC advised people who had Big Olaf Creamery ice cream at home to throw away any remaining product. On July 13, 2022, Big Olaf Creamery LLC recalled all flavors, lots, and expiration dates of Big Olaf brand ice cream through June 30, 2022.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration also conducted an investigation and on Dec. 9, 2022, sent a warning letter to Big Olaf. The letter was regarding an inspection that ran from July 19 through Sept. 1, 2022.

The FDA warning letter cited voluminous violations of federal food safety laws. It also said Big Olaf’s owners had sought third-party help to defend their business.

“(T)he firm contracted with a third-party laboratory to conduct environmental swabbing (redacted by FDA). Multiple pieces of equipment used to manufacture ready-to-eat ice cream products were reported positive for Listeria monocytogenes by their contract laboratory, including (redacted by FDA). Additionally, four swabs of finished product ice cream buckets (redacted by FDA) were reported positive for Listeria monocytogenes,” according to the warning letter.

“. . . The firm did not prepare, or have prepared, and implement a food safety plan, (as required by federal law),” according to the warning letter. During the inspection, the firm provided a draft SOP (standard operating procedure) that included various operational procedures intended to address food safety hazards associated with their manufacturing operations. It included a statement that going forward their firm will (redacted by FDA). However, this draft procedure did not fully explain how they will ensure control of hazards requiring preventive control in their ice cream products.”

The lawsuit

Seattle attorney Bill Marler, with the assistance of Florida attorney Jordan L. Chaikin, filed the civil lawsuit in federal court in Florida. They sought unspecified damages for Richard Billman for expenses and for the loss of his wife’s companionship and her role as his caretaker, as well as any other damages the court deemed appropriate.

The case was based on strict liability, breach of warranty, and negligence. It claimed that the Big Olaf ice cream was sold in an adulterated state because it was contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. It stated that the owners and operators of Big Olaf Creamery had the responsibility to sell food that was free from pathogens.

“The ice cream products reached the decedent without any change in their defective condition, and the decedent used the food products for their intended use by consuming them. That the ice cream products were contaminated by Listeria monocytogenes, a dangerous foodborne pathogen, rendered them defective in that the risks associated with consuming the ice cream products exceeded a reasonable buyer’s expectations,” according to the lawsuit.

“Defendant owed the decedent a duty to design, manufacture, distribute, and sell food that was not adulterated, that was fit for human consumption, that was reasonably safe in construction, and that was free of pathogenic bacteria or other substances injurious to human health. Defendants breached this duty.

“. . . Defendant owed the decedent a duty to use reasonable care in the manufacture, distribution, and sale of ice cream products. Defendant’s observance of this duty would have prevented or eliminated the risk that the ice cream products manufactured, distributed, and sold to customers, like the decedent, would be contaminated with dangerous bacteria like Listeria monocytogenes. The defendant breached this duty and was therefore negligent.”

In arguing for punitive damages to punish the company for its behavior, the attorney wrote: “. . . the Defendant’s conduct was so reckless and wanting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard or indifference to the life, health, and safety of individuals.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/01/judge-grants-4-million-in-wrongful-death-suit-against-big-olaf-creamery/feed/ 0
Sioux Falls voters clear a path for the new pork processing facility https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/11/sioux-falls-voters-clear-a-path-for-the-new-pork-processing-facility/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/11/sioux-falls-voters-clear-a-path-for-the-new-pork-processing-facility/#respond Thu, 10 Nov 2022 05:03:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=220748 There was one election this week that was like Milwaukee voting to ban breweries or Hersey, PA, putting the kibosh on chocolate makers. It was in Sioux Falls, SD, where an ordinance to prohibit permitting of new slaughterhouses was on Tuesday’s ballot. It failed with voters rejecting the measure by 52 percent to 48 percent... Continue Reading

]]>
There was one election this week that was like Milwaukee voting to ban breweries or Hersey, PA, putting the kibosh on chocolate makers. It was in Sioux Falls, SD, where an ordinance to prohibit permitting of new slaughterhouses was on Tuesday’s ballot.

It failed with voters rejecting the measure by 52 percent to 48 percent

Sioux Falls enjoyed prosperity once the railroads and meatpacking industries arrived shortly after South Dakota became a state. A John Morrell plant and nearby stockyards were one of the largest in the nation for much of the 20th Century.

Wholestone Farm’s plans for a small “custom slaughterhouse,” however have run into opposition from a neighborhood group that goes by the name “Smart Growth Sioux Falls.”

Wholestone Farms cut the ribbon on the project late last month, but not before the ballot measure was qualified for the ballot. Had voters adopted the ordinance, Wholestone Farms was prepared to argue that their project would be exempt as grandfathered.

Wholestone Farms Board Chairman Luke Minion thanked Sioux Falls voters and all those who’ve supported the company’s project during the process that’s now four years old.

The ordinance on the ballot faced organized opposition from “Sioux Falls Open For Busines.” It was chaired by Christine Erickson, executive director of the South Dakota Trucking Association and a former city council member. Erickson said she was proud of the citizens of Sioux Falls who “chose to keep Sioux Falls open for business.”

The pork processor plans a $500 million plant in northeastern Sioux Falls. It will start with one shift of 1,000 employees when it opens in 2025 after construction is completed. One shift will process about 3 million hogs per year. A second shift will likely be added at some point.

The project is located on industrial property, which is already the site of Wholestone Farms butcher shop processing 20 to 25 hogs per week.

Wholestone Farms and Smart Growth will likely continue to mix it up in the courts in action that was initiated in September.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/11/sioux-falls-voters-clear-a-path-for-the-new-pork-processing-facility/feed/ 0
Dozens of Canadians file class action lawsuit in relation to E. coli outbreak https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/dozens-of-canadians-file-class-action-lawsuit-in-relation-to-e-coli-outbreak/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/dozens-of-canadians-file-class-action-lawsuit-in-relation-to-e-coli-outbreak/#respond Tue, 11 Oct 2022 04:02:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=219508 About 45 people are involved in a class action lawsuit against an Alberta, Canada, Hutterite colony related to contaminated pork that led to an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak. A judge certified the case in recent days. It seeks compensation for people who were sickened after consuming pork products from The Meat Shop at Pine Haven,... Continue Reading

]]>
About 45 people are involved in a class action lawsuit against an Alberta, Canada, Hutterite colony related to contaminated pork that led to an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak.

A judge certified the case in recent days. It seeks compensation for people who were sickened after consuming pork products from The Meat Shop at Pine Haven, which is a meat packing and retail store at the Pine Haven Hutterite colony near Wetaskiwin. 

One person died and 42 others were sickened in the outbreak during the spring of 2018. The cases were linked to pork products contaminated with E. coli  O157:H7. Fourteen of the patients had to be hospitalized and five developed a kind of kidney infection known as hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), which frequently causes lifelong injuries and sometimes death.

About half of the cases involved people who had eaten at Mama Nita’s, a Filipino restaurant in southeast Edmonton that has since closed. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency traced the pork products to The Meat Shop at Pine Haven, according to court documents.

“The defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and other class members to ensure that its products were safe for consumption and that ingestion of those products would not cause illness or injury,” the plaintiffs say in their complaint.

In total, the plaintiffs seek $15 million in damages and another $1 million in special damages.

Edmonton lawyer Rick Mallett represents the plaintiffs. He expects the case could take up to two years to reach trial.

About E. coli infections
Anyone who has developed symptoms of E. coli infection should seek medical attention and tell their doctor about their possible exposure to the bacteria. Specific tests are required to diagnose the infections, which can mimic other illnesses.

The symptoms of E. coli infections vary for each person but often include severe stomach cramps and diarrhea, which is often bloody. Some patients may also have a fever. Most patients recover within five to seven days. Others can develop severe or life-threatening symptoms and complications, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

About 5 to 10 percent of those diagnosed with E. coli infections develop a potentially life-threatening kidney failure complication, known as a hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Symptoms of HUS include fever, abdominal pain, feeling very tired, decreased frequency of urination, small unexplained bruises or bleeding, and pallor. 

Many people with HUS recover within a few weeks, but some suffer permanent injuries or death. This condition can occur among people of any age but is most common in children younger than five years old because of their immature immune systems, older adults because of deteriorating immune systems, and people with compromised immune systems such as cancer patients. 

People who experience HUS symptoms should immediately seek emergency medical care. People with HUS will likely be hospitalized because the condition can cause other serious and ongoing problems such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, brain damage, and neurologic problems.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/dozens-of-canadians-file-class-action-lawsuit-in-relation-to-e-coli-outbreak/feed/ 0
New trial set for former chief of Blue Bell after first concluded with a hung jury https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/new-trial-set-for-former-chief-of-blue-bell-after-first-concluded-with-a-hung-jury/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/new-trial-set-for-former-chief-of-blue-bell-after-first-concluded-with-a-hung-jury/#respond Fri, 07 Oct 2022 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=219491 Another West Texas jury will be called next April for a second criminal trial of Paul Kruse, the retired Blue Bell Creamery president from Brenham, TX. The first jury, empaneled Aug. 1 this year, was not able to reach a unanimous agreement, ending in a mistrial after it broke 10-to-2 in Kruse’s favor. The second jury... Continue Reading

]]>
Another West Texas jury will be called next April for a second criminal trial of Paul Kruse, the retired Blue Bell Creamery president from Brenham, TX.

The first jury, empaneled Aug. 1 this year, was not able to reach a unanimous agreement, ending in a mistrial after it broke 10-to-2 in Kruse’s favor.

The second jury trial is the third swing for government prosecutors who are out to convict Kruse for his actions in 2015 involving a deadly listeriosis outbreak that shut Blue Bell down and required the recall of all its ice cream products then on the market.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) took the first strike at Kruse on May 1, 2020, when it accused Kruse of felony charges of conspiracy and fraud only to see them all dismissed because they lacked an indictment from a federal Grand Jury.

DOJ lawyers, however, righted that slip-up by Oct. 20, 2020, when they obtained a Grand Jury indictment of Kruse and filed it with the same U.S. Circuit Court in the Western District of Texas in Austin that dismissed their first attempt.

Then a couple of days before the first trial, DOJ dismissed one count of the indictment “in the interests of justice.” That left the conspiracy charge and fraud charges for the first jury to decide.

Blue Bell settled its criminal liability with the government with monetary payments, leaving Kruse as the only individual to face criminal charges because of the 2015 outbreak. 

Blue Bell pleaded guilty as a corporate entity in a related case in 2020 to two counts of distributing adulterated food products in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The company agreed to pay criminal penalties totaling $17.5 million and $2.1 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations regarding ice cream products manufactured under unsanitary conditions and sold to federal facilities, including the military.

The total $19.35 million in fines, forfeiture, and civil settlement payments was the second-largest amount ever collected to settle a food safety matter.

Kruse was president of Blue Bell Creameries until 2017 and will be tried for a second time on federal felony charges of conspiracy and fraud for allegations of suppressing some information about the 2015 listeriosis outbreak. 

During the outbreak, 10 people were sickened and three died. The 10 confirmed patients were from four states, Arizona with 1, Kansas with 5, Oklahoma with 1 and Texas with 3. All were infected and required hospitalization. Three died.

During a crisis for Blue Bell of more than 60 days in 2015, Kruse ultimately recalled all of his company’s products and closed all production facilities in Texas, Oklahoma and Alabama.

But Kruse did not act fast enough for government prosecutors who said disclosures of the listeriosis problem were withheld from customers and the public for too long.

Through “retrospective review,” the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) found isolates collected from Blue Bell ice cream that matched illnesses with onset dates from 2010 to 2014.

This Pulsenet data for DNA “fingerprints,” including three previous deaths in Kansas where listeriosis was a factor, showed all occurred before Blue Bell knew of the outbreak in early 2015.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/new-trial-set-for-former-chief-of-blue-bell-after-first-concluded-with-a-hung-jury/feed/ 0
Court action in case against former Blue Bell chief continues despite hung jury https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/court-action-in-case-against-former-blue-bell-chief-continues-despite-hung-jury/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/court-action-in-case-against-former-blue-bell-chief-continues-despite-hung-jury/#respond Wed, 05 Oct 2022 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=219405 — ANALYSIS — Today the U.S. Court for the Western District of Texas is giving its first attention since Aug. 15 to the criminal case involving former Blue Bell chief Paul Kruse.    “The court hereby sets and directs the parties, or counsel acting on their behalf, to appear by phone for an initial pretrial... Continue Reading

]]>
— ANALYSIS —

Today the U.S. Court for the Western District of Texas is giving its first attention since Aug. 15 to the criminal case involving former Blue Bell chief Paul Kruse.   

“The court hereby sets and directs the parties, or counsel acting on their behalf, to appear by phone for an initial pretrial conference on 10/05/2022 at 10:10 AM, “ the federal case dockets says.

The court declared a mistrial in the case on Aug. 15 after a jury trial broke 10-to-2 in favour of the former Blue Bell executive.

Both prosecution and defense lawyers have been silent since the mistrial.  Whether there is another jury trail is up to the government, which obtained an indictment of Kruse for conspiracy and fraud related to the deadly 2015 listeriosis outbreak that struck the iconic Texas ice cream company.

The prosecution can try again, but it isn’t required.

We could leave it there. As one famous Texan said, it might be the prudent thing to do. But what fun would that be?

We’ve been covering the United States v. Paul Kruse from the first. And we covered the 2015 listeriosis outbreak that the case comes from in real-time.  

So my sharing some after-action thoughts should be worth the risk. First, our publisher Bill Marler made an essential point to a Reuters reporter. He said there seems to be “no particular rhyme or reason” why prosecutors charge some food executives with felonies, others with misdemeanors, and others with nothing at all.

That’s from the nation’s top lawyer for foodborne illness victims who has been in the business for 30 years. If he cannot figure it out, can anyone in the food industry?

One thing the Texas trial was not was the “banality of evil that was on display in the 2014 jury trial in Albany, GA, that put away the Parnell brother for a long time. They knew about deadly pathogens in their peanut products, tested for them, and shipped their products knowing they had tested positive.

That wasn’t the fact pattern for the government’s case against Paul Kruse, the retired president of Blue Bell Creameries. He wasn’t charged with knowingly putting adulterated food into interstate commerce.

And this might be an excellent place to say that there are intelligent lawyers on both sides of the United States v. Paul Kruse. Kruse was trying to save his family’s company in crisis, but he was not trying to poison his customers. Charges were essentially financial, conspiracy, and fraud.

The Texas jury is also worth a word or two. The Western District Court of the federal court system picked the jury in a session from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.on Aug. 1. From 80 candidates came the 12-member jury with four alternates.

As I watched this proceeding, I was surprised at two things. One was how many prospective jurors wanted to talk to the judge and lawyers privately, and the second was how many had some opinion they just had to share with everybody.

It should have surprised no one that this jury managed to talk among themselves for four days and then hung themselves up with 10 favoring the acquittal of Paul Kruse versus two who found him guilty.

Next to the Texas jury, I think the biggest driver of this mistrial was the prosecution witnesses. If you were waiting for a “Perry Mason” moment from one of them, you were likely disappointed.

The prosecution did an excellent job rounding up upset people because Kruse kept a clamp on the information flow early in the outbreak. They were from institutions like school districts and retailers like Walmart.

During the cross-examination of these witnesses, defense attorney Chris Flood would ask if that person’s constituency — school kids or retail customers — got sick or if Blue Bell had fully compensated them with credits or cash reimbursements.

In every case, the prosecution witness would say there was no harm, no foul. Those answers had the effect of cutting the legs out from under the financial circumstance of conspiracy and fraud.

The first time the government brought this case in 2020, it was tossed because it had not been brought before a Grand Jury. The government did get the Grand Jury indictment within the 5-year statute of limitations.

The conspiracy and fraud charges trial went 10-to-2 against the government’s position. Still, the government is entirely within its rights to bring Kruse to a second jury trial.

For the food safety community, there is also the “bright line” case we want as a future standard. Is this it or not?

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/10/court-action-in-case-against-former-blue-bell-chief-continues-despite-hung-jury/feed/ 0
EU court clarifies rules in Estonian fish Listeria case https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/08/eu-court-clarifies-rules-in-estonian-fish-listeria-case/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/08/eu-court-clarifies-rules-in-estonian-fish-listeria-case/#respond Thu, 04 Aug 2022 04:03:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=217319 An EU court has provided an interpretation of the rules as part of a complex domestic case in Estonia involving Listeria and fish. The European Court of Justice found that the zero tolerance limit on Listeria cannot be applied to food which has left the control of the producer and is already on the market.... Continue Reading

]]>
An EU court has provided an interpretation of the rules as part of a complex domestic case in Estonia involving Listeria and fish.

The European Court of Justice found that the zero tolerance limit on Listeria cannot be applied to food which has left the control of the producer and is already on the market.

M.V. Wool and the food agency in Estonia are involved in national proceedings at the Administrative Court in Tallinn, which are ongoing.

The request for EU help was made in the case between M.V. Wool, a manufacturer of fish products, and the Agriculture and Food Board (PTA) in Estonia concerning two decisions made by the authority after detection of Listeria monocytogenes in food placed on the market by the company.

In August 2019, the Estonian authority took samples from a retail store of some salmon and trout products manufactured by M.V. Wool. After Listeria monocytogenes was detected, Estonian officials ordered the firm to suspend manufacturing of the products, recall the entire batch and to inform consumers.

In October, after finding Listeria monocytogenes in some of its products, M.V. Wool disinfected two operating plants. However, Listeria continued to be detected in some products from these sites. In November, the Estonian authority ordered M.V. Wool to suspend operations at the sites until it had proof that contamination had been eliminated.

Interpreting the rules
M.V. Wool brought proceedings before the Administrative Court in Tallinn to annul the decisions, claiming the Estonian authority was not entitled to apply the limit requiring the absence of Listeria monocytogenes in 25-grams to samples taken from retail.

The company believes the limit does not apply to items already on the market. For these products, the limit is 100 colony forming units per gram (CFU/g) during shelf-life. Listeria monocytogenes above these levels had never been found in the firm’s products, according to M. V. Wool.

The Estonian authority said that since the company has not proven its products would not exceed 100 CFU/g of Listeria monocytogenes throughout their shelf-life, it is the zero tolerance limit that applies, regardless of whether they are under the control of the manufacturer or have already been sent to market. 

Cold-smoked trout and salmon produced in Estonia by M. V Wool was linked to a Listeria monocytogenes outbreak that affected 22 people in five countries from 2014 to 2019. Five people died.

The Administrative Court in Tallinn refered to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling on which interpretation was correct as this would impact the lawfulness of the authority’s decisions in August and November around operations at the company.

The first limit of 100 CFU/g applies to products placed on the market during their shelf-life, where the manufacturer is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the appropriate authority that it will not exceed this level.

The zero tolerance part applies before food has left the control of the food business and where that operator is unable to show the authority that product will not exceed 100 CFU/g throughout the shelf-life.

Rules do not cover a situation when a product is already on the market and where the manufacturer is unable to demonstrate it will not exceed 100 CFU/g during shelf-life.

The EU court ruled that where the company is unable to satisfy the authority that, throughout the shelf life, foodstuffs will not exceed the limit of 100 CFU/g for Listeria monocytogenes, the zero tolerance limit will not apply to items which have been placed on the market throughout their shelf-life.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.          

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/08/eu-court-clarifies-rules-in-estonian-fish-listeria-case/feed/ 0
Kruse trial begins Monday with jury selection https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/kruse-trial-begins-monday-with-jury-selection/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/kruse-trial-begins-monday-with-jury-selection/#respond Mon, 25 Jul 2022 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=216970 At Broken Arrow, OK, Blue Bell Creamery made unlimited ice cream available for the 20th Annual Taste of Summer Festival. And a 13-year-old North Texas girl gave Blue Bell the inspiration for one of its new summer flavors. Blue Bell has been making news all summer, but hardly any is about the criminal trial of... Continue Reading

]]>
At Broken Arrow, OK, Blue Bell Creamery made unlimited ice cream available for the 20th Annual Taste of Summer Festival. And a 13-year-old North Texas girl gave Blue Bell the inspiration for one of its new summer flavors.

Blue Bell has been making news all summer, but hardly any is about the criminal trial of its former president that begins one week in Austin.  

Throughout Texas and beyond, Blue Bell is mainly celebrated for those new flavors, its support of local celebrations, and July as National Ice Cream Month.

But the United States v. Paul Kruse draws the attention of those who the Western District Court in Austin has notified to report for jury duty next Monday. Blue Bell dominates the market in the West Texas counties where the court plans to seat ts jury.

Judge Robert Pitman held the likely last pre-trial hearing with the lawyers last Friday. The court did not release the minute entry documents for that session. Court documents seem to show Pitman did make decisions on at least three Motions in Limine.

According to the Legal Dictionary, a motion in limine is a motion made to the court before a jury has been selected in either a civil or a criminal case. 

Motions in limine ask the court to order the opposing party, its counsel, and witnesses not to talk about, or even mention, certain facts or evidence in the presence or hearing of the jury. 

If the motion is granted, nobody is allowed to bring up those facts without first obtaining permission from the court, which must be requested outside the presence of the jury. To explore this concept, consider the following motion in limine definition.

In this case, defense attorneys for Kruse want to bar the government from presenting evidence or arguments that Blue Bell should have recalled ice cream sooner or more broadly than it did during a 2015 listeriosis outbreak that killed three and made 10 others very sick.

The defense also wants to strike certain information about sanitation issues at Bell Bell from the trial documents. Pre-trial issues about some details of the jury instructions are also disputed going into the trial.

As for that 13-year-old girl who came up with a new Blue Bell flavor, it was while drinking a strawberry lemonade that she came up with it. Strawberry ice cream swirled with lemonade sherbert is the new flavor

She wrote Blue Bell as part of a class project with her idea, never thinking they would implement it. But they did.  

A federal Grand Jury indicted Kruse in 2020 after a five-year investigation.

The Austin-based federal Western District Court for Texas “finds the United States v. Kruse a complex criminal case.” 

As a corporate entity, Blue Bell pleaded guilty in a related case in 2020 to two counts of distributing adulterated food products in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The company agreed to pay criminal penalties totaling $17.5 million and $2,1 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations regarding ice cream products manufactured under unsanitary conditions and sold to federal facilities, including the military. The total $19.35 million in fines, forfeiture, and civil settlement payments was the second-largest amount ever paid in resolving a food safety matter.

Kruse is the only individual facing criminal charges due to the 2015 outbreak.

Blue Bell Creameries, founded in 1907 in Brenham, TX, today produces Blue Bell ice cream, an iconic Texan brand.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/kruse-trial-begins-monday-with-jury-selection/feed/ 0
When is sanitary history too ripe for the jury? https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/when-is-sanitary-history-too-ripe-for-the-jury/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/when-is-sanitary-history-too-ripe-for-the-jury/#respond Wed, 06 Jul 2022 04:06:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=216211 Does a company’s sanitary record figure into its possible criminal conduct when involved in an outbreak of foodborne illness? That question is being disputed during the pre-trial stage of the United States v. Paul Kruse. Pre-trial motions are scheduled for July 22 in the Texas Western District court in Austin. Kruse, 67, is the retired... Continue Reading

]]>
Does a company’s sanitary record figure into its possible criminal conduct when involved in an outbreak of foodborne illness?

That question is being disputed during the pre-trial stage of the United States v. Paul Kruse. Pre-trial motions are scheduled for July 22 in the Texas Western District court in Austin.

Kruse, 67, is the retired president of Blue Bell ice cream, the iconic Texas brand that in 2015 was at the center of a deadline listeriosis outbreak. As they approach the Aug.1 trial date for the start of the federal criminal trial that will decide his guilt or innocence, Kruse’s defense attorneys have moved to exclude sanitary issues from jury review.

The defense team, Chris Flood of House and John Cline of Seattle, have moved to strike sanitation issues from the indictment, thereby preventing that information from ever going to the jury.

The four government prosecutors assigned to the case oppose the defense motion. “Because the allegations regarding sanitation issues are material and relevant to the defendant’s scheme to defraud Blue Bell Creameries, L.P. (Blue Bell) customers, the motion should be denied,” government attorneys say.

Tara M. Shinnick, Matthew Lash, Patrick H. Hearn, and Kathryn A. Schmidt are the four attorneys assigned to represent the government. All four are from the U.S. Department of Justice Consumer Protection Branch.

Kruse was indicted in 2020 for one count of conspiracy and six counts of wire fraud. He pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The indictment claims there was a conspiracy to obtain money from Blue Bell customers by “false and fraudulent” pretenses.

The government attorneys say Kruse “knew for years that appropriate practices to ensure sanitary conditions were not being followed and achieved at Blue Bell manufacturing facilities, a practice which resulted in a deadline outbreak of disease.”

They say the origins of the 2015 listeriosis outbreak at two Blue Bell plants occurred “long before. “The evidence at trial will show that as early as 2010, the defendant was aware of roof leaks, condensation, and other unsanitary conditions at Blue Bell plants and yet allowed them to persist, prosecutors tell the court. “Under his leadership, Blue Bell shipped products with levels of coliforms that he knew exceeded the state standard. 

“.Coliform testing is commonly used in the food industry to indicate the sanitary quality of products and the sanitary conditions of manufacturing facilities,” they add. “It is understood in the food industry that high levels of coliforms indicate unsanitary conditions in the facility, which can lead to bacteria and contamination issues, including the presence of L. mono (Listeria monocytogenes).”

In keeping the sanitation issues before the yet-to-be picked jury, the government says that because of high coliform levels at Blue Bell facilities, the company’s Quality Assurance team started testing finished products for Listeria in 2011. 

They say the Quality Assurance Manager will testify at trial that Kruse ordered it be shut down. “After this instruction from the defendant, two samples that had already been sent for testing came back presumptively positive for Listeria.

 According to the government, the defendant again ordered the program to be shut down when told about the presumptive positive tests. “The evidence at trial will show that Blue Bell shipped those presumptive positive products out to customers without regard to their safety.”

The defense argued that a discussion of sanitary issues is “surplusage” to the indictment. The prosecution cites judicial sources to say that such a motion must be “exacting and strict” and is rarely granted.

The prosecutors say a “court should not grant a defendant’s motion to strike surplusage as prejudicial unless it is clear that the information is not relevant and is prejudicial.” 

“If the evidence of the allegation is admissible and relevant to the charge, then despite prejudice, the language will not be stricken,” they add.

Kruse is a resident of Brenham, TX, the headquarters of Blue Bell, and its long association with his family.

He issued, in 2015, the first recall in the company’s century-long history and suspended all production for several weeks. In the four-state outbreak, there were three deaths among 10 illnesses. All 10 patients were hospitalized.

A federal Grand Jury indicted Kruse in 2020 after a five-year investigation.

The Austin-based federal Western District Court for Texas has state that it “finds the United States v. Kruse a complex criminal case.” 

As a corporate entity, Blue Bell pleaded guilty in a related case in 2020 to two counts of distributing adulterated food products in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The company agreed to pay criminal penalties totaling $17.5 million and $2.1 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations regarding ice cream products manufactured under unsanitary conditions and sold to federal facilities, including the military. The total $19.35 million in fines, forfeiture, and civil settlement payments was the second-largest amount ever to resolve a food safety matter.

Kruse is the only individual facing criminal charges because of the 2015 outbreak.

Blue Bell Creameries, founded in 1907 in Brenham, TX, today produces Blue Bell ice cream for national distribution.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/when-is-sanitary-history-too-ripe-for-the-jury/feed/ 0
Seven face charges in deadly Listeria outbreak in Spain https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/seven-face-charges-in-deadly-listeria-outbreak-in-spain/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/seven-face-charges-in-deadly-listeria-outbreak-in-spain/#respond Fri, 01 Jul 2022 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=216119 Seven people are set to stand trial as part of Spain’s largest ever Listeria outbreak, which occurred in 2019. A judge in a court in Seville this week decided to continue proceedings against seven defendants for offences including alleged crimes against public health and injury to a fetus resulting in abortion. At the conclusion of... Continue Reading

]]>
Seven people are set to stand trial as part of Spain’s largest ever Listeria outbreak, which occurred in 2019.

A judge in a court in Seville this week decided to continue proceedings against seven defendants for offences including alleged crimes against public health and injury to a fetus resulting in abortion. At the conclusion of an investigation into the outbreak, Pilar Ordóñez also considered that Seville Council could be held civilly liable, this means it would have to pay compensation if convicted.  

The outbreak from “La Mecha” brand chilled roasted pork produced by Magrudis affected almost 250 people. During the health alert between mid-August and mid-October 2019, four people died and there were six abortions.

Those investigated are José Antonio Marín Ponce, administrator of Magrudis; his wife, Encarnación Rodríguez Jiménez, responsible for production and the company’s self-control system; their children Sandro José and Mario Marín Rodríguez as well as a local veterinary inspector and two other people. Action against another four people has been stopped.

The council is accused of poor performance in its public service role. The inspector of the Magrudis facilities did not collect enough product samples, check surfaces, or samples of the interior environment to verify whether the factory met the necessary conditions despite being obliged to assess the potential risk and level of compliance, according to officials.

The Guardia Civil investigated the company as part of Operation Monocy with the help of Europol.

A judge’s assessment
The outbreak was reported by Spanish authorities to the World Health Organization, via the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) in late August 2019.

Expenses generated by two hospitals in response to the outbreak of listeriosis amounted to €800,000 ($833,000), said the authorities.

Expert reports as part of the proceedings highlighted bad practices carried out by the company and the “lack of consideration” of food safety.

“The spread of the outbreak was due to the lack of transparency of Magrudis, not communicating from the first minute the types of products made, the type of products distributed and the batches of each of them,” said the judge, based on expert findings.

Once the potentially harmful product was put on the market the risk could no longer be controlled and even if the defendants did not imagine the result of their actions, they knew there was the possibility of causing harm to the health of consumers, added the judge.

Facua, a consumer group which is representing 79 sick people, welcomed the progress in proceedings.

However, the association criticized Seville Council for not doing enough to prevent another Magrudis case by improving controls and adding to the number of inspectors.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/07/seven-face-charges-in-deadly-listeria-outbreak-in-spain/feed/ 0
Foodwatch complaint targets Nestlé and Ferrero https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/05/foodwatch-complaint-targets-nestle-and-ferrero/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/05/foodwatch-complaint-targets-nestle-and-ferrero/#respond Mon, 23 May 2022 04:05:42 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=214763 A consumer watchdog has filed a complaint against Nestlé and Ferrero in relation to recent E. coli and Salmonella outbreaks involving the companies. In the action, Foodwatch France lists seven offences including placing on the market products harmful to health and failure to implement procedures to withdraw or recall such a product, endangering the lives... Continue Reading

]]>
A consumer watchdog has filed a complaint against Nestlé and Ferrero in relation to recent E. coli and Salmonella outbreaks involving the companies.

In the action, Foodwatch France lists seven offences including placing on the market products harmful to health and failure to implement procedures to withdraw or recall such a product, endangering the lives of others and export to a non-EU country of food potentially harmful to health.

The two complaints include the case of Louna, a 6-year-old, who was hospitalized because of a Salmonella infection after eating Kinder chocolate, said Foodwatch. The multi-country outbreak has sickened hundreds.

The Nestlé E. coli outbreak involves 56 cases and two deaths from Buitoni brand Fraîch’Up pizzas in France. Production at the factory in Caudry was stopped in April. The Paris prosecutor’s office has opened a criminal inquiry into the incident.

The Ferrero monophasic Salmonella typhimurium chocolate outbreak has affected at least 324 people in 16 countries. Belgian authorities halted production at the Arlon facility in April, and an investigation has been launched by the Luxembourg Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The two Foodwatch complaints against Nestlé and Ferrero were filed in Paris this week by the law firm Teissonniere Topaloff Lafforgue Andreu et Associés (TTLA) on behalf of the group and several victims. They are seeking sanctions against the companies and compensation for the victims.

Criticism of food control system
“When you are an agri-food giant like Nestlé or Ferrero, you cannot ignore the law and take your food safety responsibilities lightly. However, Kinder and Buitoni products have made many children sick as well as adults. This is unacceptable. Nestlé and Ferrero must be held to account,” said Karine Jacquemart, director of Foodwatch France.

Foodwatch said the incidents were preventable or their impact could have at least been reduced.

“These cases show that we cannot trust Nestlé and Ferrero, despite being leaders in their sector, and that the self-checking system entrusted to manufacturers is not sufficiently effective. In both cases, it was the health authorities who had to sound the alarm in the face of a worrying outbreak. While the alert should have come from the manufacturers. How could Nestlé and Ferrero, responsible for ensuring the safety of the food they market, let contaminated products leave their factories for weeks without noticing?”

The consumer group said it has been concerned for years about the system being reactive instead of preventive, recalls when it is already too late, problems posed by inefficient self-controls, a lack of public resources and weak sanctions.

Foodwatch has also published an open letter that people can sign to show their support for the complaint and to those sickened.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/05/foodwatch-complaint-targets-nestle-and-ferrero/feed/ 0
Court overturns decision in Tiger Brands Listeria case https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/02/court-overturns-decision-in-tiger-brands-listeria-case/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/02/court-overturns-decision-in-tiger-brands-listeria-case/#respond Mon, 07 Feb 2022 17:41:55 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=211651 A court in South Africa has overturned a previous decision to make companies divulge information in relation to a deadly Listeria outbreak in 2017 and 2018. The Supreme Court of Appeal ruling reverses a Gauteng High Court verdict on whether subpoenas issued against third parties were relevant to the class-action. Tiger Brands is facing a... Continue Reading

]]>
A court in South Africa has overturned a previous decision to make companies divulge information in relation to a deadly Listeria outbreak in 2017 and 2018.

The Supreme Court of Appeal ruling reverses a Gauteng High Court verdict on whether subpoenas issued against third parties were relevant to the class-action. Tiger Brands is facing a class-action following an outbreak of listeriosis between January 2017 and September 2018 that sickened more than 1,050 people, killing 218.

People contracted Listeria monocytogenes infections after eating contaminated ready-to-eat meat products, such as polony, made at a factory in Polokwane by Enterprise Foods between October 2016 and March 2018. At the time Enterprise Foods was owned by Tiger Brands.

The Supreme Court of Appeal judgment paves the way for the next step in the legal process.

Tiger Brands subpoenaed other meat producers and laboratories to see if, during the period that they are accused of distributing contaminated food, others might have done so as well. This might have diluted the harm for which they may be liable.

Class action proceedings were filed against Tiger Brands by Richard Spoor Attorneys to get compensation for victims. Richard Spoor Attorneys is representing people affected by the outbreak and Marler Clark LLC of Seattle is serving as a consultant. The first stage will determine whether Tiger Brands is liable while a second case would determine damages.

Relevance to class action
Richard Spoor said in the past 18 months the case has stalled while Tiger Brands “engaged in a fishing expedition.”

“Tiger’s strategy of delay and blame sharing has cost the victims dearly, many, including infants with severe brain injuries, who require medical care and counseling to cope with their loss or disability have been denied it and have endured great hardship as a result,” he said.

Spoor added he hoped the judgment would serve as a wake-up call for the company.

The National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD) investigation focused on Listeria monocytogenes sequence type (ST6) when it was found that results from clinical tests matched those from the Polokwane facility. In April 2018, Tiger Brands revealed it had received independent lab tests which detected ST6 in samples of ready-to-eat meat products from the factory.

Subpoenas were issued against 11 parties including Deltamune and Aspirata, which are commercial testing laboratories. As well as firms including Federated Meats, Curly Wee Boerdery, Ibis Piggery, Molare Investments and Winelands Pork that supplied raw meat products to Tiger Brands.

Tiger Brands had already amended them by reducing the number of documents requested but the other parties still objected to the demand. Such documents may have helped the firm argue it was not the only one responsible for the outbreak.

The court ruled that Tiger Brands’ argument to investigate whether it was the sole source of the outbreak was not relevant to the class-action as claimants are only seeking to hold it responsible for harm. It added the demand for documents was “speculative” and seemed to be based on the hope it would find a basis for co-liability with another party.

A Tiger Brands statement said the outbreak had affected many South Africans.

“We are saddened by the impact it has had on the lives of the victims and those who have lost loved ones from the outbreak. Tiger Brands reiterates its commitment to ensure that a resolution of the matter is reached in the shortest possible time, in the interest of all parties, particularly the victims of listeriosis.”

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2022/02/court-overturns-decision-in-tiger-brands-listeria-case/feed/ 0
An Oregon grocer and its beef supplier are split over who pays for outbreak costs https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/an-oregon-grocer-and-its-beef-supplier-are-split-over-who-pays-for-outbreak-costs/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/an-oregon-grocer-and-its-beef-supplier-are-split-over-who-pays-for-outbreak-costs/#respond Thu, 28 Oct 2021 04:05:54 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=208647 A grocer wants to recover more than $2.7 million from its beef supplier for an incident involving the sale of product contaminated with E. coli O157:H7. The claim by New Seasons Market LLC and New Leaf Community Markets Inc. filed in Oregon Circuit Court in Portland was lodged against Country Natural Beef Inc. and Oregon... Continue Reading

]]>
A grocer wants to recover more than $2.7 million from its beef supplier for an incident involving the sale of product contaminated with E. coli O157:H7.

The claim by New Seasons Market LLC and New Leaf Community Markets Inc. filed in Oregon Circuit Court in Portland was lodged against Country Natural Beef Inc. and Oregon Country Beef. The sales occurred in 2019.

New Seasons operates a chain of full-service grocery stores in Oregon, Washington and Northern California. Since its founding, the grocery store chain has featured local producers like Country Nature Beef. It provided the stores with “premium and delicious” beef products from cattle raised without antibiotics, added growth hormones, or growth promotions.

According to the complaint, New Seasons stores relied on Country Natural Beef  for “uncontaminated, consumer-grade beef products.”

In the runup to October and November 2019, New Seasons made regular “fully paid” purchases for its stores from Country Natural Beef for stores in and around Portland.

On Nov. 8, 2019, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) and the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) told New Seasons that illnesses were caused by beef sold in their stores because it was contaminated with E. coli O157:H7.

New Seasons agreed to immediately terminate all sales of ground beef and beef products and to begin recalling the products the OHA and ODA suspected might contain the bacteria. New Season stores removed beef products from its display case and ceased all sales, which continued for one to three months.

The initial recall notices were expanded to include all-beef products packed from Oct. 19, 2019, to Nov. 8, 2019, with sell-by dates from Oct. 23, 2019, to Nov. 11, 2019. New Seasons says the recall caused many of its customers to return their beef purchases to their stores.

IEH Laboratories & Consulting Group, Oregon’s independent testing lab, found E. coli O157:H7 in two beef samples taken from a New Seasons beef counter, and the 20 percent fat ground beef was supplied by Country Natural Beef.

New Seasons credits Country Natural Beef, which is based in Redmond, OR, with conducting a “root cause analysis” on the E. coli outbreak and implementing a new testing policy.

But, New Seasons reports it has incurred “significant losses,” which may not be over:

“These losses include, without limitation, the following, all of which were reasonably and necessarily incurred by New Seasons under the circumstances: (i) the expenses associated with issuing and implementing the recall; (ii) the property damage loss arising from the disposal of all of the ground beef and beef products covered by the recall (as well as the refunds issued to customers); (iii) the expenses associated with non-routine cleaning of New Seasons stores; (iv) the expenses associated with investigating the source of the E. coli O157:H7 contamination; (v) professional and consulting fees related to the E. coli O157:H7 outbreak and the resulting recall; (vi) business interruption losses, including lost revenue arising from the suspension of sales of ground beef and other beef products; and (vii) loss of goodwill.”

In its complaint, New Seasons cites multiple claims, complaints, and inquiries from customers that may have been negatively impacted by the outbreak. At the time the lawsuit was filed, New Seasons said its damages totaled more than $2.7 million.

New Seasons is suing to recover those damages used on claims of breach of contract, breach of implied warranty common law indemnity, and negligence.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/an-oregon-grocer-and-its-beef-supplier-are-split-over-who-pays-for-outbreak-costs/feed/ 0
Some sickened in Salmonella outbreak in the UK ask lawyers for help https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/some-sickened-in-salmonella-outbreak-in-the-uk-ask-lawyers-for-help/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/some-sickened-in-salmonella-outbreak-in-the-uk-ask-lawyers-for-help/#respond Tue, 19 Oct 2021 04:05:21 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=208349 A number of people have asked lawyers to investigate whether their illness was part of a Salmonella outbreak linked to pork scratchings in the United Kingdom. Among those involved are a man from Malton, North Yorkshire, who was hospitalized and diagnosed with a Salmonella Infantis infection after eating pork scratchings, and a retired elite swimmer... Continue Reading

]]>
A number of people have asked lawyers to investigate whether their illness was part of a Salmonella outbreak linked to pork scratchings in the United Kingdom.

Among those involved are a man from Malton, North Yorkshire, who was hospitalized and diagnosed with a Salmonella Infantis infection after eating pork scratchings, and a retired elite swimmer from Merseyside.

The Salmonella Infantis outbreak has sickened 179 people since September 2020, mostly in England but also in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. At least a dozen people have been hospitalized. Almost two thirds of those sick have been reported since June this year.

Public Health England, now known as the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), said 56 percent of cases are male, and ages range from 0 to 91 years old with a median of 53.

Tayto Group Limited recalled some Mr. Porky, Jay’s and The Real Pork Crackling Co. products in August after they were linked to the outbreak.

Sick people seek answers
Sebastian Thornton, from Malton, reported eating Mr. Porky pork scratchings as part of a Thai dish and fell ill shortly afterward on July 1 with fever, diarrhea, sweats, and lethargy. He also experienced shakes and was passing blood.

The self-employed professional joiner was hospitalized on July 4 and discharged on July 6 with antibiotics. The impact of illness lasted about six weeks, during which time the 37-year-old wasn’t able to work.

“By the time I heard about the recall, I had already eaten the pork scratchings. Within a few days, I felt awful,” he said.

“I ended up having to go into hospital and after I was discharged I was told I had Salmonella infantis. It’s really worrying to think that so many other people have also been struck down with symptoms of Salmonella. I feel it’s important that an investigation takes place to try and prevent this from happening to others in the future.”

Daniel Roberts, from Wirrall, fell ill on August 21 with fever, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. By the end of August, the 40-year-old was still suffering.

“I’ve never felt so unwell before and it continued for so long that I had to contact the NHS. I was really worried when I heard that it could be Salmonella. I’m still feeling a little off, more than a month on. I really hope that it’s investigated as I wouldn’t wish what I went through on my worst enemy,” said the retired elite swimmer.

Jatinder Paul, senior associate solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, said it was vital that lessons are learned to improve food hygiene standards.

“We’re aware of a large number of individuals who say they have been affected by this outbreak and we would be interested in speaking to anyone who may have been impacted by this incident who would be able to assist with our investigations. While we welcome the product recall, we’re now investigating further in order to provide our clients with the answers they deserve,” he said.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/10/some-sickened-in-salmonella-outbreak-in-the-uk-ask-lawyers-for-help/feed/ 0
Jimmy John’s franchisee could have to pay punitive damages in E. coli case https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/jimmy-johns-franchisee-could-have-to-pay-punitive-damages-in-e-coli-case/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/jimmy-johns-franchisee-could-have-to-pay-punitive-damages-in-e-coli-case/#respond Sat, 24 Jul 2021 00:52:37 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=205934 A man who was sickened by contaminated sprouts on a Jimmy John’s sandwich has been given permission by a Utah judge to seek punitive damages in a case related to his 2020 illness. Travis Knorr and his wife Aimee Knorr filed the civil case in Utah’s Third Judicial District Court in Salt Lake City on... Continue Reading

]]>
A man who was sickened by contaminated sprouts on a Jimmy John’s sandwich has been given permission by a Utah judge to seek punitive damages in a case related to his 2020 illness.

Travis Knorr and his wife Aimee Knorr filed the civil case in Utah’s Third Judicial District Court in Salt Lake City on March 31, 2020, seeking compensatory damages for medical costs and other direct costs from Travis Knorr’s E. coli O103:H2 infection.

His illness was determined to be part of a nationwide outbreak that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said was traced to raw sprouts served by Jimmy John’s restaurants. The CDC reported 51 people as confirmed infected across 10 states. Three people were so sick they had to be admitted to hospitals, including Knorr.

Travis Knorr is a 46-year-old training director with the Utah Department of Corrections. He ate a Jimmy John’s sandwich with fresh sprouts on Feb. 21, 2020, and became ill on Feb. 26. He had severe diarrhea and had to leave work on Feb. 28. Ultimately he tested positive for E. coli.

Travis provided a stool specimen on March 3, 2020, and LabCorp reported preliminary results on March 5. His stool was confirmed positive for E. coli Shiga Toxin (STEC) by EIA testing. He eventually developed a C. difficile infection and required a fecal transplant. 

In a ruling this week Judge Douglas Hogan granted the Knorrs’ motion to also seek punitive damages in addition to the compensatory damages. It is relatively rare for punitive damages to be part of a food poisoning case, according to one of the couple’s attorneys, Bill Marler.

Under Utah law punitive damages are designed to punish the plaintiff in a lawsuit for knowing disregard. They also serve as a deterrent to discourage other entities from acting in the same manner.

“It will be up to the jury to decide the damages, regular and punitive. But the judge doesn’t have to do what the jury recommends,” Marler said. “Punitive damages are usually proportionate to compensatory damages but are generally not more than 10 times the amount of compensatory damages.”

Regular damages in the Knorr case could be upwards of $250,000, but those damage amounts have not been specified by Knorr’s attorneys. A trial date has been set for February 2020.

The franchisee named as the defendant in the case is Dwight & Linford Enterprises LLC, D/B/A Jimmy John’s, a Utah corporation. The case against the franchisee illustrates one of almost 80 outbreaks linked to sprouts served by Jimmy John’s restaurants across the country going back to 1973, according to documents from Benjamin Chapman, a fresh produce expert and food pathogen researcher from North Carolina State University.

“It’s past time for Jimmy John’s to pay attention to this problem,” said Marler of the overall issues with sprouts served by the restaurants across the country. “This is about behavior over time. It’s moved from ‘gee it was a mistake’ to egregious behavior.”

The judge agreed with the Knorrs’ request to seek punitive damages, saying that “although a franchisee may have taken some actions that contribute to plaintiff’s injuries, many of those same actions can rightly be ascribed to Dwight & Linford as well.

“These include failure to take the contaminated sprouts off the menu, failure to practice good risk communication toward customers, and failure to provide adequate resources to food handlers to control the cross-contamination of sprouts,” the judge continued in his granting of the Knorr’s request to seek punitive damages.

“As to Dwight & Linford’s contention that punitive damages are not supported by the evidence, in this case, plaintiffs point to these and other actions, as well as the expert opinion of Benjamin Chapman, Ph.D., to refute this claim. . . 

“Finally, plaintiffs cite Utah Code, which states that punitive damages are appropriate when the acts or omissions of the defendant are the results of ‘conduct that manifests a knowing and reckless indifference toward, or disregard of the rights of others.’ “

Editor’s note: Attorney Bill Marler is the publisher of Food Safety News.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/jimmy-johns-franchisee-could-have-to-pay-punitive-damages-in-e-coli-case/feed/ 0
Prosecutors drop charges in strawberry tampering incident involving needles https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/prosecutors-drop-charges-in-strawberry-tampering-incident-involving-needles/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/prosecutors-drop-charges-in-strawberry-tampering-incident-involving-needles/#respond Thu, 15 Jul 2021 04:02:53 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=205661 Charges against a woman accused of putting needles in strawberries in 2018 in Australia have been dropped. My Ut Trinh, an ex-farm worker, had been charged with contamination of goods and was scheduled to go on trial in Brisbane District Court. Local media quoted Judge Michael Byrne telling Trinh’s interpreters that the prosecution would no... Continue Reading

]]>
Charges against a woman accused of putting needles in strawberries in 2018 in Australia have been dropped.

My Ut Trinh, an ex-farm worker, had been charged with contamination of goods and was scheduled to go on trial in Brisbane District Court.

Local media quoted Judge Michael Byrne telling Trinh’s interpreters that the prosecution would no longer proceed against her with the charges. News.au.com reported the action was dropped “because it was unlikely she would be convicted at trial, prosecutors say.”

Outside court, defense lawyer Nick Dore thanked Trinh’s supporters and said it was the right decision, according to reports.

In September 2018, reports of food tampering started involving sewing needles in strawberries. Initially affecting Queensland, it spread to involve multiple tampering of strawberries and other fruit across the country.

More than 200 food tampering reports were made nationally. Only a few were believed by authorities to be associated with the original incident with most thought to be hoaxes or copycat events.

Implicated strawberries were removed from sale and stronger penalties were introduced for food tampering plus stricter conditions for strawberry export.

A Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) report on the incident in 2019 made seven recommendations.

It found the government’s response to the food tampering was timely but communication between different agencies needed to be improved.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/07/prosecutors-drop-charges-in-strawberry-tampering-incident-involving-needles/feed/ 0
Lawsuits piling up against baby food firms over potential damage to infant brain development https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/06/lawsuits-piling-up-against-baby-food-firms-over-potential-damage-to-infant-brain-development/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/06/lawsuits-piling-up-against-baby-food-firms-over-potential-damage-to-infant-brain-development/#respond Wed, 23 Jun 2021 04:02:32 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=205094 There are reports of more than 80 lawsuits filed against firms that were named in a February congressional report about highly dangerous levels of arsenic and other poisons in baby food. The report, requested by federal legislators in November 2019, reviewed four toxic heavy metals: inorganic arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury. The Food and Drug... Continue Reading

]]>
There are reports of more than 80 lawsuits filed against firms that were named in a February congressional report about highly dangerous levels of arsenic and other poisons in baby food.

The report, requested by federal legislators in November 2019, reviewed four toxic heavy metals: inorganic arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury. The Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization have declared them dangerous to human health, particularly to babies and children, who are most vulnerable to their neurotoxic effects. Even low levels of exposure can cause serious and often irreversible damage to brain development, according to the report.

On Nov. 6, 2019, following reports of high levels of toxic heavy metals in baby foods, the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy requested internal documents and test results from some of the largest manufacturers of baby food in the United States, including makers of organic and conventional products. Arsenic was present in baby foods made by all companies that responded to the congressional request.

Manufacturers listed in the report include Beech-Nut, Earth’s Best Organic, HappyBABY, Happy Family Organics, Gerber, Parent’s Choice, Plum Organics and Sprout Organic Foods.

In March, a group of plaintiffs filed a request to consolidate their claims against the baby food makers before a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, where a majority of the cases are pending.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denied the transfer on June 7, finding that cases would be too defendant specific.

“At a general level, these actions are similar. All plaintiffs allege that defendants knowingly sold baby food products containing heavy metals and did not disclose this in their marketing. It is not disputed, though, that each defendant manufactures, markets, and distributes its own baby food products subject to different manufacturing processes, suppliers, and quality control procedures,” the judicial panel said.

“The claims against each defendant thus are likely to rise or fall on facts specific to that defendant, such as the amount of heavy metals in its products, the results of its internal testing, if any, and its marketing strategies.”

Some of the lawsuits include groups of parents who contend that the toxins found in the baby food led to the development of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in their children. 

Beech-Nut discontinues rice cereal
On June 9, 2021, The Beech-Nut Nutrition Co. initiated a recall of some of its infant rice cereals because of excessive levels of arsenic. And now the company will stop selling infant rice cereal altogether, saying it may not be able to consistently abide by the guidance level in the future.

“The safety of infants and children is Beech-Nut’s top priority,” said Jason Jacobs, Beech-Nut vice president of food safety and quality.

“We are issuing this voluntary recall, because we learned through routine sampling by the State of Alaska that a limited quantity of Beech-Nut Single Grain Rice Cereal products had levels of naturally-occurring inorganic arsenic above the FDA guidance level, even though the rice flour used to produce these products tested below the FDA guidance level for inorganic arsenic,” said Jason Jacobs, vice president, Food Safety and Quality.

The recall follows the FDA guidance level limits on inorganic arsenic in infant rice cereal set in August 2020. There are no limits on arsenic in other baby foods or limits for other heavy metals, including cadmium, lead, and mercury despite the potential health risk to young children.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/06/lawsuits-piling-up-against-baby-food-firms-over-potential-damage-to-infant-brain-development/feed/ 0
Ag Secretary Vilsack, Food Safety Deputy Eskin in court defense of new hog inspection program https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/05/ag-secretary-vilsack-food-safety-deputy-eskin-in-court-defense-of-new-hog-inspection-program/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/05/ag-secretary-vilsack-food-safety-deputy-eskin-in-court-defense-of-new-hog-inspection-program/#respond Thu, 06 May 2021 04:05:58 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=203717 On the same day that a federal judge in Minnesota issued an order slowing line speeds under the New Swine Inspection Program, attorneys for USDA in California filed a cutting 45-page answer to an amended complaint by other plaintiffs also wishing to bring down the program. Filed in U.S District Court for the Northern District... Continue Reading

]]>
On the same day that a federal judge in Minnesota issued an order slowing line speeds under the New Swine Inspection Program, attorneys for USDA in California filed a cutting 45-page answer to an amended complaint by other plaintiffs also wishing to bring down the program.

Filed in U.S District Court for the Northern District of California, USDA responded for Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety Sandra Eskin.

“At the outset, defendants object to plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint for failing to set forth a short and plain statement of the claims showing that plaintiffs are entitled to relief, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2).

“Plaintiffs have set forth 369 numbered paragraphs spanning 76 pages, which, to a large extent, do not contain allegations of fact. Rather, they set forth legal argument and rhetoric unnecessary and inappropriate for a complaint.

“Defendants are unable to admit or deny paragraphs containing such argument and rhetoric. Furthermore, defendants deny plaintiffs’ repeated characterizations of and partial quotations from statutes, regulations, and other documents, as these documents speak for themselves. Should the court desire a further response to plaintiffs’ argument, rhetoric, characterizations of documents, and partial quotations from documents, Defendants respectfully reserve the right to amend this Answer.”

The fact that the new Secretary of Agriculture and his top deputy for food safety were defending the new swine inspection program in California on the same day it was taking a hit in Minnesota is significant. Their response says the “Defendants deny any and all allegations in the Second Amended Complaint not expressly admitted herein to which a response is deemed required.”

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) adopted the final modernization rule for swine in October 2019. The lawsuits followed in 2020. The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unions sued in the U.S. District Court for Minnesota.

Federal Judge Joan N. Ericksen, on March 31, issued an opinion limiting line speeds to 1,106 hogs per hour but leaving the remainder of the modernization program intact. She also or delayed her order by 90 days. That means it won’t become effective until around July 1.

The Center for Food Safety, the Humane Farming Association, Food and Water Watch, and pork consumer Robin Mangini are plaintiffs in the Northern California case. They sued USDA in January 2020, claiming the New Swine Inspection System (NSIS) amounts to a “radical transformation” of federal swine inspection protocols.

Parties in the Nothern California case are proceeding with a case management conference, first scheduled for April 16. They’ve agreed to the re-scheduled conference to occur no later than July 22, 2021.

Federal Judge Jeffrey S. White has set the ground rules. He believes each party will likely file one motion for summary judgment.

He said if the parties file cross-motions for summary judgment, they shall meet and confer to determine the order of filing and only admit four briefs to the court for its review:

  1. Opening summary judgment motion
  2. Opposition and cross-motion.
  3. Reply to moton and opposition to cross-motion,
  4. Reply to cross-motion (filed at least two weeks before hearing.)

White reminded the parties that they are responsible for disclosing information and management discovery disputes. At this time, the judge is not referring the matter to Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.) 

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/05/ag-secretary-vilsack-food-safety-deputy-eskin-in-court-defense-of-new-hog-inspection-program/feed/ 0
Former guru follower decries bio-terror guilt in new Netflix documentary https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/former-guru-follower-decries-bio-terror-guilt-in-new-netflix-documentary/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/former-guru-follower-decries-bio-terror-guilt-in-new-netflix-documentary/#respond Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:03:08 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=203439 Ma Anand  Sheela is in the spotlight again. The mastermind behind the largest bioterror attack in U.S history, that resulted in more than 700 Salmonella infections, is the subject of a new Netflix documentary. “Searching for Sheela” is about Sheela’s current life and follows her as she returns to India from her home in Switzerland... Continue Reading

]]>
Ma Anand  Sheela is in the spotlight again. The mastermind behind the largest bioterror attack in U.S history, that resulted in more than 700 Salmonella infections, is the subject of a new Netflix documentary.

“Searching for Sheela” is about Sheela’s current life and follows her as she returns to India from her home in Switzerland after 30 years abroad. In the documentary, she discusses at length her relationship with “guru” Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and her crimes committed in the mid-1980s that led to a 20 year prison sentence.

In the documentary, Sheela says that she is “not the person people think I am.” When asked if she committed the 1984 bio-terror attack, Sheela answered, “No, I did not do it. I would not do it. I am my parents’ daughter who had learned the correct values of life.”

This is the second Netflix documentary starring Sheela and the story of the Rajneeshpuram community. The 2018 docuseries “Wild Wild Country” was a massive hit that brought Sheela to renewed fame.

This new fame even led to Amazon Studios setting up a film adaption of the story, titled “Sheela.” Priyanka Chopra Jonas, the actress, singer, producer and winner of the 50th Miss World pageant will star as Ma Anand Sheela in the film. The film is expected to raise awareness of the serious health threat of Salmonella poisoning.

The largest bioterror attack in U.S. history

Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh

The 1984 terrorist attack was portrayed at length in the 2018  documentary series  “Wild Wild Country.” The documentary told the story of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and the food poisoning terrorist attack on the people of The Dalles, OR, in 1984. More than 700 people contracted Salmonella infections after followers of Rajneesh, under Ma Anand Sheela’s instruction, contaminated salad bar ingredients in 10 local restaurants.

Several thousand of Rajneesh’s followers had moved onto a ranch in rural Wasco County in 1981 and incorporated as a city they named Rajneeshpuram. They took political control of the small nearby town of Antelope and hoped to take over leadership of Wasco County because of land use conflicts caused by the commune’s drastic expansion.

The plan was to use the Samonella to make regular voters sick so the Rajneesh’s followers could be elected. Sheela and another leading Rajneeshpuram official ultimately were convicted on charges of attempted murder. After serving 39 months of 20-year sentences in a minimum-security federal prison, Sheela was released on good behavior.

In all, 751 people were sickened in the attack. Forty-five people were hospitalized, but there were no fatalities, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/former-guru-follower-decries-bio-terror-guilt-in-new-netflix-documentary/feed/ 0
Lawyer’s ‘severe health crisis’ could complicate Stewart Parnell’s hearing https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/lawyers-severe-health-crisis-could-complicate-stewart-parnells-hearing/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/lawyers-severe-health-crisis-could-complicate-stewart-parnells-hearing/#respond Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:05:09 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=203315 The attorney who led the defense of Stewart Parnell in his 2014 criminal trial is set to testify next month about “claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Thomas J. Bondurant Jr. is a former federal prosecutor and now a partner at Roanoke, VA-based Gentry Locke. He’s among the “Best Lawyers in America” for Corporate Compliance Law... Continue Reading

]]>
The attorney who led the defense of Stewart Parnell in his 2014 criminal trial is set to testify next month about “claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Thomas J. Bondurant Jr. is a former federal prosecutor and now a partner at Roanoke, VA-based Gentry Locke. He’s among the “Best Lawyers in America” for Corporate Compliance Law and White Collar Criminal Defense. 

Defense attorneys don’t usually agree to testify that they provided a former client with ineffective counsel. But that’s what Bondurant plans to do. However, he will now be testifying via video teleconference.

Bondurant, on April 14, informed the attorneys involved “of a recent health crisis that has resulted in hindered mobility and fatigue, both of which make travel extremely difficult for him.”  The veteran defense lawyer is under a “timely subpoena” to appear at Parnell’s Motion 2255 hearing, scheduled for May 24 in Albany, GA. Bondurant is scheduled to be a witness regarding Parnell’s ineffective counsel claims.

Amy Lee Copeland, Parnell’s attorney for the Motion 2255 hearing, has filed a motion uncontested by government attorneys to permit Bondurant to appear and testify at the evidentiary hearing by video teleconference.

Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff will preside over Motion 2255 hearings for both Stewart Parnell on May 24 and his brother Michael Parnell on May 27.  When he granted the 2255 claim, Langstaff’s said: “The law is clear that, in order to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing, a petitioner need only allege – not prove — reasonably specific, non-conclusory facts that, if true, would entitle him to relief.”

Video teleconferencing also remains a backup solution for any COVID concerns that come up. However, the “in-person” hearings should go forward in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. The court is in the C.B. King Courthouse in Albany, GA.

Parnell was sentenced in 2015 to a 28-year  prison term, which he is currently serving at a federal prison in West Virginia. He will be returned to the courtroom where a jury convicted him in 2014 so the federal magistrate can hear oral arguments on a motion to vacate his conviction and sentence on grounds he was denied, effective counsel.

 In September 2019,  Bondurant supported Parnell’s motion to vacate the conviction and sentence with a declaration, telling about a prospective juror who said he wanted to “extract my pound of flesh” from Parnell.

When asked what he’d heard about the case, Bondurant said that juror responded by saying: “I own an ag irrigation dealership, part of that, I’m a third-generation peanut farmer in Sumter County. So I have invested thousands of dollars in market promotion and it was tanked. Everything we did was washed away. Not only did they endanger children’s lives, but they also destroyed our market. I know people. Y’all kept referring to Lab 1 and Lab 2. I don’t know who Lab 2 is, but I know who Lab 1 is. I heard all about the samples. Of course, I know everything I read in — I read in the Albany Herald, and I read it in all of our trade magazines.”

Parnell’s appellate attorneys plan to show how Georgia’s peanut-growing counties turned hostile toward Parnell after PCA poisoned its customers and tainted the industry’s reputation. They are going to argue that Parnells’ trial attorneys should have sought a change of venue out of the hostile territory.

Parnell was indicted on Feb. 15, 2013, about four years after a Salmonella outbreak caused by peanut butter and peanut paste produced by Parnell’s Peanut Corporation of America plant poisoned thousands around the country and resulted in at least seven deaths. Parnell and four other PCA executives or managers were charged with conspiracy; introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce with intent to defraud or mislead; introduction of misbranded food into interstate commerce with intent to defraud or mislead; mail fraud; wire fraud; and obstruction of justice.

Following a  jury trial in August and September 2014, Parnell was found guilty of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud, conspiracy to introduce adulterated and misbranded food into interstate commerce, multiple counts of introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce, multiple counts of Introduction of misbranded food into interstate commerce, multiple counts of mail fraud, multiple counts of wire fraud, and two counts of obstruction of justice.

Parnell filed a post-trial motion for a new trial on Oct. 6, 2014, alleging that juror misconduct prejudiced his right to a fair trial. In part,  he alleged that jury members discussed salmonella-related deaths allegedly caused by PCA’s products and that Juror 34 showed juror bias.

 The court held two hearings, calling in every selected juror for individual questioning at the second hearing. One juror testified that other jurors had conducted their own research over the course of the trial and discovered that the defendants “killed nine people” in the outbreak.

That juror did not bring this alleged misconduct to the attention of any defendant or defendants’ counsel until after the trial had concluded. After a detailed review of juror testimony, the court found that “[v]iewing the totality of the circumstances, the court finds that there is no indication that any juror concealed harbored bias from the court or the defendants. . . [and] the court finds that the defendants failed to demonstrate that any juror failed to honestly answer any question during voir dire.”

In regard to whether the jury was exposed to prejudicial extrinsic information, the court found that three jurors stated that deaths were discussed in the jury room, but that “the discussion of deaths arose from a misperception or incorrect recollection of the trial testimony or evidence [that deaths were caused], not from the extrinsic source.”

Parnell was sentenced to 28 years in prison, which began when he entered on Sept. 21, 2015.  It is to be followed by three years of supervised release.

Parnell appealed his conviction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta.

On appeal, he again argued that he was entitled to a new trial based on the jury’s alleged exposure to extrinsic evidence that people died as a result of the salmonella outbreak, that the district court erred in allowing testimony from former operating managers as to business records, and that the government’s evidence of loss was not sufficiently specific or reliable.

 The Eleventh Circuit court assumed that “at least several of the jurors who sat on the case were exposed to extrinsic evidence,” but that the extrinsic evidence did not influence or contribute to the jury verdict. The Eleventh Circuit further found that the former operating managers had ample knowledge from which to testify and that there was no error in admitting this testimony, and that any remand for recalculation of the loss amount was futile and any errors in the district court’s calculation were harmless.

Meanwhile, Stewart’s brother Michael, who was also convicted of multiple felony counts and sentenced to 20 years, is making similar arguments.

“Trial counsel’s failure to investigate and call witnesses was not a strategy but a violation of Sixth Amendment standards and warrants presentation to the Court to make the case of just how material testimony would have been,” wrote Charlottesville, VA, attorney Elliott Harding on Michale’s behalf last April.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/04/lawyers-severe-health-crisis-could-complicate-stewart-parnells-hearing/feed/ 0
Marler renews call for declaring ‘outbreak serotypes’ of Salmonella as adulterants in meat and poultry https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/03/marler-renews-call-for-declaring-outbreak-serotypes-of-salmonella-as-adulterants-in-meat-and-poultry/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/03/marler-renews-call-for-declaring-outbreak-serotypes-of-salmonella-as-adulterants-in-meat-and-poultry/#respond Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:05:00 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=201781 Food safety attorney Bill Marler wants to know what’s up with his petition calling on the USDA to declare specific “outbreak serotypes” of Salmonella as adulterants in meat. He filed the petition more than a year ago, on Jan. 19, 2020, with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), on behalf of Rick Schiller, Steven... Continue Reading

]]>
Food safety attorney Bill Marler wants to know what’s up with his petition calling on the USDA to declare specific “outbreak serotypes” of Salmonella as adulterants in meat.

He filed the petition more than a year ago, on Jan. 19, 2020, with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), on behalf of Rick Schiller, Steven Romes, the Porter family, Food & Water Watch, Consumer Federation of America, and Consumer Reports.

The petition asks FSIS to declare the following Salmonella “outbreak serotypes” as per se contaminants in meat and poultry products:

Salmonella Agona, Anatum, Berta, Blockely, Braenderup, Derby, Dublin, Enteritidis, Hadar, Heidelberg, I 4,[5],12:i:-, Infantis, Javiana, Litchfield, Mbandaka, Mississippi, Montevideo, Muenchen, Newport, Oranienburg, Panama, Poona, Reading, Saintpaul, Sandiego, Schwarzengrund, Senftenberg, Stanley, Thompson, Typhi, and Typhimurium.

Marler says reducing salmonellosis from meat and poultry “demands bold action” beyond that yet taken by FSIS. Salmonella is a leading cause of foodborne illness in the United States, causing 1.35 million illnesses, 26,500 hospitalizations, 130 outbreaks, and 420 deaths each year.

Marler wrote Paul Kiecker, USDA’s Acting Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety. He filed a copy with the Docket Clerk.

While diagnostic technology has improved, researchers say that does not entirely explain why Salmonella’s presence has increased.
According to the Interagency Food Safety Analytics Collaboration, food regulated by FSIS “substantially contributes” to the public health burden.

“Designing Salmonella performance standards to more closely align with the goal of reducing foodborne illness is fundamental to improving food safety,” Marler wrote.

“Currently, Salmonella performance standards measure how well an establishment is reducing the frequency with which its products test positive for contamination by any Salmonella species. FSIS verification testing may identify virulent strains of Salmonella that are linked to currently ongoing outbreaks, but the product nevertheless can go into commerce so long as the establishment has a sufficient number of ‘negative’ samples and is otherwise meeting the rules designed to show that its plant conditions are not ‘insanitary.’ This indirect approach is not working.”

“To protect the public, FSIS needs to acknowledge that certain Salmonella serotypes pose an unacceptable risk to consumers and make rules to keep adulterated products contaminated by these serotypes off the shelves,” he concludes. ” Accordingly, we invite you to respond favorably to our petition.”

After the petition was filed, this past September, the FSIS presented a “Salmonella-State of the Science” seminar.  At that time, the FSIS released its most recent plan to decrease Salmonella, which it recognizes as one of the leading causes of foodborne illnesses. The “Roadmap to Reducing Salmonella: Driving Change through Science-Based Policy” outlines programs and policies that are science-based, data-driven, and promote innovation to reduce Salmonella in meat, poultry, and egg products.

“This roadmap represents FSIS’s commitment to lead with science and data in all that we do. It puts us on a course to aggressively target Salmonella and other foodborne pathogens,” USDA’s former Under Secretary for Food Safety Mindy Brashears said at the time of the seminar.

During a four-month comment period, the petition received 377 comments, including many who used a template provided by an alternative food organization.

Finally, Marler reminded FSIS that under both the Administrative Procedure Act and court decisions, agencies owe petitioners a response within a “reasonable time.”  He said those responses may be compelled by the courts if an unreasonable delay has occurred.

Editor’s Note: Bill Marler, managing partner of Marler Clark LLP PS, is also the publisher of Food Safety News.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/03/marler-renews-call-for-declaring-outbreak-serotypes-of-salmonella-as-adulterants-in-meat-and-poultry/feed/ 0
Publisher’s Platform: They say this, the others say that, but people got sick either way https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/publishers-platform-they-say-this-the-others-say-that-but-people-got-sick-either-way/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/publishers-platform-they-say-this-the-others-say-that-but-people-got-sick-either-way/#respond Fri, 05 Feb 2021 19:29:09 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=200842 Opinion Thompson International has called out the FDA and CDC in the United States and the Canadian food safety and public health authorities in relation to a Salmonella outbreak in 2020 that was linked to the company’s onions. The company says their onions were not the problem. Here is Thomson International’s and their financial backers’... Continue Reading

]]>
Opinion

Thompson International has called out the FDA and CDC in the United States and the Canadian food safety and public health authorities in relation to a Salmonella outbreak in 2020 that was linked to the company’s onions. The company says their onions were not the problem.

Here is Thomson International’s and their financial backers’ position on a Salmonella outbreak that has sickened thousands in the United States and Canada:

The FDA took over 2000 swabs of Thomson’s onions, fields, and facilities and was unable to locate any trace of Salmonella Newport. In fact, the FDA has since cleared Thomson International and has allowed them to continue its operations.

It appears at this time the FDA made a rash decision to recall Thomson’s onions and although their investigation has not concluded as to the root cause of the Salmonella Newport, the FDA has advised they are no longer looking at Thomson as the cause.

Based on our investigation to date, we cannot entertain any claims presented as a result of this recall at this time. Be assured Thomson has complied with all FDA requests and will preserve any evidence obtained as a result of this recall investigation.

Here is the FDA’s, CDCs and food safety and public health entities in Canada’s position:

On July 9, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state partners commenced an investigation of an outbreak of Salmonella Newport cases linked to red, white, yellow, and sweet yellow onions in 2020. This outbreak was assigned the CDC ID 2007MLJJP-1.

As of October 8, a total of 1,127 lab-confirmed cases of Salmonella Newport from 48 states (AK 25, AL 2, AZ 39, AR 2, CA 128, CO 32, CT 2, DE 2, FL 8, GA 11, HI 3, ID 43, IL 54, IN 4, IA 31, KS 3, KY 3, ME 6,  MD 7, MA 2, MI 47, MN 19, MS 5, MO 11, MT 72, NE 10, NV 11, NH 1, NJ 12, NM 3, NY 14, NC 6, ND 9, OH 11, OK 1, OR 109, PA 27, RI 3, SC 1, SD 23, TN 7, TX 2, UT 115, VA 10, WA 150, WV 3, WI 11, WY 27) have been counted in the outbreak. Illnesses started between June 19 and September 11, 2020. Cases ranged from under one 1 to 102 years old (median 41). Fifty-eight percent of cases were female. Of the 705 cases with information available, 167 reported hospitalization, and none were reported to have died. All case isolates were closely related to each other (within 0-6 alleles).

In Canada, there were 515 confirmed cases of Salmonella Newport illness linked to this outbreak in the following provinces: British Columbia (121), Alberta (293), Saskatchewan (35), Manitoba (26), Ontario (14), Quebec (25) and Prince Edward Island (1). Individuals became sick between mid-June and late-August 2020. Seventy-nine individuals were hospitalized. Three people died, but Salmonella did not contribute to the cause of these deaths. Individuals who became ill were between 1 and 100 years of age. The majority of cases, 54 percent, were female. Individuals who were ill reported eating red onions at home, in menu items ordered at restaurants, and in residential care settings. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) conducted a food safety investigation and issued related food recall warnings. More information on recalled products is available on CFIA’s website. The U.S. CDC also reported an outbreak of Salmonella Newport illnesses with a similar genetic fingerprint to illnesses reported in Canada.

In interviews conducted with cases, ninety-five percent of people reported eating onions or foods containing onions in the week before they fell ill. Of the 208 cases with information available, 66 percent reported red onion consumption, 63 percent reported white onion consumption, and 53 percent reported yellow onion consumption. Fifty-eight percent of cases reported exposure to several types of onions. Thirty-four distinct clusters have been identified in 13 states to be associated with this outbreak. Information was collected on 23 of these clusters, and restaurants and grocery stores associated with these 23 clusters were found to serve red (17), yellow (13), or white (10) onions. Sixteen subclusters were associated with multiple onion exposures.

Epidemiologic evidence and traceback information indicated that red onions were the likely source of this outbreak. However, due to harvesting practices, other onions were likely contaminated as well. Onions by Thomson International, Inc. of Bakersfield, California, and several other companies (ALDI, Food Lion, Giant Eagle, Hello Fresh, Imperfect Foods, Kroger, Publix, Ralph’s, Trader Joe’s, and Walmart) were recalled in response to this outbreak starting August 1, 2020. Foods made with the recalled onions, such as cheese dips and spreads, salsas, and chicken salads were also recalled in association with the outbreak (from Fred Meyer, Fry’s Food Stores, Giant Eagle, Kroger, Smith’s, Spokane Produce, Stop and Shop, Walmart, Amana Meat Shop and Smokehouse, and Taylor Farms). Hello Fresh recalled onions received by customers between May 8 and July 31 on August 19, 2020.

A sharp decline in cases occurred after the onion recall, furthering the likelihood of them as the source of the outbreak. FDA conducted environmental sampling at farms and processing plants of interest, but no matching strains were discovered at these locations. On Oct. 8, 2020, the outbreak was considered over.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/publishers-platform-they-say-this-the-others-say-that-but-people-got-sick-either-way/feed/ 0
Lawsuit challenges FDA approval of additive that makes Impossible Burger ‘bleed’ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/lawsuit-challenges-fda-approval-of-additive-that-makes-impossible-burger-bleed/ https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/lawsuit-challenges-fda-approval-of-additive-that-makes-impossible-burger-bleed/#respond Thu, 04 Feb 2021 05:05:34 +0000 https://www.foodsafetynews.com/?p=200705 The Center for Food Safety is challenging the FDA’s approval of a color additive used to make Impossible Foods’ plant-based burger appear to “bleed” like real meat. The advocacy group claims that the FDA’s decision was not based on “convincing evidence” as required by regulation. In a brief filed Jan. 28 in the Ninth Circuit U.S.... Continue Reading

]]>
The Center for Food Safety is challenging the FDA’s approval of a color additive used to make Impossible Foods’ plant-based burger appear to “bleed” like real meat. The advocacy group claims that the FDA’s decision was not based on “convincing evidence” as required by regulation.

In a brief filed Jan. 28 in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the center is specifically challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s 2019 approval of soy leghemoglobin.

“FDA approved soy leghemoglobin even though it conducted none of the long-term animal studies that are needed to determine whether or not it harms human health,” said Bill Freese, science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety (CFS).

“This includes studies for cancer, reproductive impairment and other adverse effects called for by FDA’s Redbook, the Bible of food and color additive testing. We find this to be all the more troubling because a number of potential adverse effects were detected in a short-term rat trial: disruption of reproductive cycles and reduced uterine weights in females and biomarkers of anemia, reduced clotting ability and kidney problems.”

The novel “heme” colorant is produced in genetically engineered (GE) yeast and is modeled on a protein found in the roots of soybeans. The ingredient is also referred to as genetically engineered “heme,” soy leghemoglobin. It is the color additive Impossible Foods uses to make its plant-based burger appear to “bleed” as if it were beef. 

“FDA’s failure to require Impossible Foods to conduct long-term tests called for in the agency’s own authoritative guidelines means it does not have ‘convincing evidence’ that this color additive, consumed by millions, is safe,” said Ryan Talbott, staff attorney at CFS.

“The approval of soy leghemoglobin must be revoked, unless and until truly convincing evidence proves it to be safe.”

The GE heme is a color additive preparation that also contains more than a dozen yeast proteins.

 In order to make this GMO heme, Impossible Foods uses the process of synthetic biology to extract DNA from the roots of soy plants — where a small amount of heme is produced — and then inserts the DNA into genetically engineered yeast where it is fermented to mass-produce the genetically engineered heme.

Because GE heme is new to the human diet, and substantial quantities are added to the Impossible Burger, CFS contends that the FDA should have required extensive safety testing before approving its use as a color additive, as required by law.

The FDA is supposed to have an extremely high bar for approval for color additives in food. The agency’s “convincing evidence” standard means that a color additive cannot be approved without the strongest possible evidence of safety, a higher bar than for other food additives. However, Impossible Foods’ products containing GE heme are now widely available in supermarkets across the country because of what CPS believes was the FDA’s unlawful approval of GE heme as a color additive. according to the center officials.

The full legal brief can be viewed here.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

]]>
https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2021/02/lawsuit-challenges-fda-approval-of-additive-that-makes-impossible-burger-bleed/feed/ 0