Cheat Sheet: A guide to navigating two new federal consumer safety measures
The food we eat, the clothes we wear and the toys we give to children are such integral parts of our lives that we often dont give them a second thought.
January 17, 2013 at 07:56 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The food we eat, the clothes we wear and the toys we give to children are such integral parts of our lives that we often don't give them a second thought. But in recent years reports of Salmonella outbreaks and high lead levels have spurred concern over food and consumer product safety.
In an effort to combat these hazards, the U.S. government has introduced the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act and 2011's Food Safety Modernization Act. In our January cover story, “Safe Measures,” InsideCounsel examines the implications of these two pieces of landmark legislation and provides expert advice for companies seeking to comply with their requirements.
What is the history of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FMSA)?
A series of well-publicized Salmonella outbreaks—linked to foods such as peanut butter, eggs and tomatoes—helped to spur the January 2011 passage of the FSMA. The law's aim was to emphasize the prevention of outbreaks, rather than focusing on the reaction to those outbreaks.
Under the FSMA, facilities that manufacture, process or package food must register with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which has the power to suspend the registration of processors if it finds they have produced food that is likely to cause serious adverse health consequences. The FDA also has mandatory recall authority as part of the law, although it says it will only use this power if companies fail to issue a voluntary recall.
What other measures did the FSMA introduce?
The FSMA also mandates that facilities that manufacture, process and package food must implement food safety plans that identify the specific safety risks of their products, create procedures to minimize or avoid these hazards and identify corrective steps to be taken in case of contamination. Although that requirement went into effect in July 2012, the FDA missed the deadline for issuing regulations implementing the law
Earlier this month, the FDA finally proposed two new food safety rules connected to the law. One requires companies to establish the formal food safety plans outlined above; the other sets national quality standards for farms that produce and harvest fruits and vegetables.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSenators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anticompetitive Practices, Fees
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Trending Stories
- 1People in the News—Nov. 26, 2024—Barley Snyder, McNees
- 2Akin, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins Are First Texas Big Law Firms to Match Milbank Bonuses
- 3Walking a Minute in Your Adversary’s Shoes: Addressing the Issue of 'Naive Realism' at Mediation
- 4The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 5New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250