Our Manufacturing Agreement Says What?!

I am always amazed when a new client informs me they do not have a written agreement with their third party manufacturer(s).  Or, they have one but don’t know the key terms or haven’t looked at it in years.  So when I heard about this case, I figured it was a good topic for discussion.  Ask yourself this– if your third party manufacturer told you tomorrow they decided to stop manufacturing your products, how long would it take you to find a replacement manufacturer and get your products to market? Would the transition result in delayed shipments and lost sales?  According to the beauty giant, L’Oreal, it would need about a year to find a new supplier for at least two of its products and would run out of stock, causing irreparable harm, including losing valuable shelf space at key retailers. Unfortunately for L’Oreal, however, the master manufacturing agreement between it and Spatz Laboratories only required 3-months notice of termination. Continue reading “Our Manufacturing Agreement Says What?!”

Court Dismissals of “Made in USA” Class Actions

Two cases involving allegations that companies falsely labeled their products as “Made in USA” and thereby violated California’s “Made in USA” statute have recently been dismissed.  In April, the Southern District Court of California dismissed all claims against Heinz.  Then, earlier this month on June 6, the Central District Court of California dismissed all claims against Stearn’s Products.  In both cases, the issue came down to the fact the plaintiff simply did not adequately allege facts to state a claim under the law.  Importantly, in the Stearn’s case, the court also ruled that the new version of California’s “Made in USA” law applies retroactively to products put in the marketplace prior to January 1, 2016. Continue reading “Court Dismissals of “Made in USA” Class Actions”