News & Analysis as of

Warning Labels California Food Manufacturers

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Trial Court Strikes Down California’s Prop 65 Acrylamide Warning Requirements

A Federal District Court in California has ruled that Proposition 65 warning requirements for dietary acrylamide are unconstitutional. The California Chamber of Commerce (“CalChamber”) sued five years ago challenging the...more

DLA Piper

Federal Court Declares Proposition 65 Warnings for Acrylamide in Food Unconstitutional

DLA Piper on

The US District Court for the Eastern District of California on May 2, 2025 granted summary judgment in favor of the California Chamber of Commerce, holding that Proposition 65 warning requirements for acrylamide in food...more

Greenberg Glusker LLP

Court Finds Requiring Prop. 65 Warnings for Acrylamide in Food is Unconstitutional

Greenberg Glusker LLP on

On May 2, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a landmark ruling in California Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, Case No. 2:19-cv-02019, holding that Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) warning...more

King & Spalding

New Federal Court Decision Holds Proposition 65 Warnings Are Not Required Where There Was No Scientific Consensus on the...

King & Spalding on

In an important decision under California’s Proposition 65, a federal court recently ruled that businesses cannot be required to provide a product warning under Proposition 65 where there is no scientific consensus on whether...more

Greenberg Glusker LLP

Judicial Burn: Court Declares Proposition 65 Acrylamide Warning Unconstitutional

Greenberg Glusker LLP on

Acrylamide, a Proposition 65-listed substance that naturally forms in the cooking and heating of many plant-based foods, has been the focus of court action over the past six years. However, companies will no longer be...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

District Court Issues Permanent Injunction Enjoining Enforcement of Prop 65 Warning Requirements for Dietary Acrylamide

On May 2, 2025, the Eastern District of California found that Prop 65 warning requirements for dietary acrylamide violate the First Amendment, and granted a permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of those warnings....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Navigating the Legal Soup: A New “Short-Form” Recipe for Prop 65 Warnings on Food and Beverages

Until this year, food companies—often the target of Proposition 65 enforcement actions—have been limited to specific “full-length” language for Prop 65 warnings, without explicit guidance regarding whether short-form warnings...more

Downey Brand LLP

A Year in Review – Prop. 65 Notices: Unleaded Gasoline Notices Emerge as a Top Trend Across the State in 2023

Downey Brand LLP on

Two thousand twenty-three was no exception to the trend of recent years in the ever-increasing issuance of private enforcer-led Proposition 65 60-Day Notices of Violation (“Notices”) to businesses allegedly selling consumer,...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment to Defendants in Proposition 65 Coffee Case

After 12 years of litigation, coffee manufacturers, distributors, and retailers are one step closer to closing the door on Proposition 65 warnings on coffee. Coffee generally does not require Proposition 65 warnings—this...more

Alston & Bird

Federal Judge Enjoins Enforcement of Prop. 65 Warning Requirements for Acrylamide in Food and Beverages

Alston & Bird on

A California district court has granted a preliminary injunction to the California Chamber of Commerce and prohibited the filing of new Proposition 65 lawsuits alleging exposure to acrylamide in food. Our Environment, Land...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide