Cargill to pay $70,000, plus legal fees, to Washington environmentalists

A federal appeals court has revived a lawsuit that accused food manufacturer Conagra Brands of falsely advertising frozen chicken products as natural and preservative-free.

Last year, the complaint was dismissed by U.S. District Judge David Carter in Santa Ana, Calif., who decided it was pre-empted by the USDA’s approval of the package.

However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has now ruled the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed because Conagra’s website advertising “materially differs from the product label” and wasn’t approved by the agency.

Also, the burden is on Conagra to prove that USDA actually reviewed and approved the frozen chicken product label, the 9th Circuit said.

The lawsuit was brought by consumer Robert Cohen, who claimed it’s false and misleading under California law to advertise the chicken products as natural and preservative-free because they actually contain chemical agents that improve color, slow spoilage and have thickening properties.

The judge dismissed the case because the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service had approved the product labels under federal meat inspection statutes that prohibit “different or additional” state labeling standards.

The 9th Circuit said it agreed with the fundamental policy reasons for federal pre-emption of meat labeling standards under the Poultry Product Inspection Act.

“Allowing private consumers to second-guess the agency’s decisions through state law claims against producers would both circumvent that pre-approval process and conflict with the PPIA’s goal of national uniformity,” the appeals court said.

However, the plaintiff alleges that Conagra relied on a “generic approval process” that didn’t require USDA review, which would mean the product label wasn’t pre-empted by federal law, the 9th Circuit said.

“The only evidence before us is the label itself — there are no affidavits or other documentary evidence showing that the label was submitted to and approved by FSIS,” the ruling said.

Though Conagra eventually submitted such documentation to the 9th Circuit, such evidence cannot be entered “through the back door” during the appeals process and must be considered in U.S. District Court, the ruling said.

As for Conagra’s website, the company stated its frozen product is “made with 100% natural, white meat chicken and without preservatives, artificial flavors, or artificial colors,” which is “not materially identical” to the label.

The statement about “100% natural, white meat chicken” cannot be challenged in court if it was approved by USDA, but the rest of the statement implies the whole product doesn’t contain “preservatives, artificial flavors, or artificial colors.”

For that reason, the representation that Conagra’s entire chicken products don’t contain these substances is not pre-empted by federal law, the 9th Circuit said.