Ondrej Kruk, Business Unit
Manager & Print and Apply
Labeling (LPA) expert,
Consumers buy products according to
personal choice. Brand reputation, packaging and labeling influence their decision.
Health-conscious and environmentally aware consumers not only
seek information about the nutritional value of food, but also its
source. To compete on the globally, food manufacturers must meet
local and international food safety and labeling standards. These
require products to display extensive and legible product information,
and unique codes for traceability throughout the entire food chain.
Customization of primary and secondary packaging requires a
significant amount of information, like dates, lot codes, production
details, shelf-life and traceability data, either on the product or its
packaging. As consumer demand grows, Stock Keeping Units (SKUs)
proliferate, each needing a different set of information, increasing the
risk of mislabeled products. To reduce this risk and increase efficiency, manufacturers apply codes during production using late-stage
customization, so the required data can be added directly onto the
package instead of relying on pre-printed labels. The flexibility afforded by in-line coding and late stage customization allows for quick
changeovers, reducing downtime and unnecessary waste. This works
well for products destined for overseas where different languages and
specific market-related information are required.
Late-stage customization on packaging lines requires technology
to handle multiple labeling materials and adapt to varying through-
put and line speeds. Manufacturers often use print-and-apply label-
ing machines because they can be integrated to existing lines and
are flexible enough to be used on many packaging materials, with
barcode technology providing unit- and batch-specific information.
Manufacturers must use barcode-reading equipment to ensure the
codes are readable throughout the global distribution chain. ◆
■ May/June 2014
ǇŽƵ;ĐŽƵ Ě;ďĞ;Ă;; ĂƐƐ;DĞŵďĞƌ;ŝŶ;Ă;ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ;
Đ ĂƐƐ;ĂĐƟŽŶ;ƐĞƩ ĞŵĞŶƚ;
This legal notice is to inform you of the proposed Cal-Maine Settlement reached in
the class action lawsuit, In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation, Case No.
08-md-02002, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, and also inform you of an amendment to the Sparboe Settlement.
tŚŽ;ŝƐ;ŝŶĐ ƵĚĞĚ;ŝŶ;ƚŚĞ;;Ă ;DĂŝŶĞ;^ĞƩ ĞŵĞŶƚ;Θ;^ƉĂƌďŽĞ;;ŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ;
The Cal-Maine Settlement “Class” includes all persons and entities in the United
States that purchased shell eggs and egg products, in the United States directly from
any producer from January 1, 2000 through February 28, 2014. Due to the Cal-Maine
Settlement, the prior Sparboe Settlement, approved by the Court in 2012, is amended
to add to the Sparboe Settlement Class direct purchases of shell eggs and egg products
from October 24, 2009 through February 28, 2014, expanding the Class Period to make it
comparable to the Cal-Maine Class.
Plaintiffs claim that Defendants conspired to limit the supply of shell eggs and egg
products, which raised the price of shell eggs and egg products and, therefore, violated
the Sherman Antitrust Act, a federal statute that prohibits agreements that unreasonably
restrain competition. Cal-Maine and Sparboe deny all of Plaintiffs’ allegations.
tŚĂƚ;ĚŽĞƐ;ƚŚĞ;;Ă ;DĂŝŶĞ;^ĞƩ ĞŵĞŶƚ;ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ;
The Cal-Maine Settlement is with Cal-Maine only; the case is continuing against the
remaining defendants. Plaintiffs will release all claims against Cal-Maine. In exchange,
Cal-Maine will provide the Class with $28,000,000 from which claims can be paid.
Cal-Maine will also provide Plaintiffs with information that Plaintiffs’ attorneys believe
will aid in their analysis and prosecution of this Action.
There is no monetary relief under the Original or Amended Sparboe Settlement. Sparboe
agreed to provide substantial and immediate cooperation to Plaintiffs, which the Court
already found conferred substantial benefits upon the Class. The amendment merely
conforms the Sparboe Class to the Cal-Maine Class.
If you are a Class Member your legal rights are affected, and you now have a choice
to make. Participate in the Settlements: No action is required to remain part of the
Cal-Maine Settlement or the amended Sparboe Settlement. If the Court grants final
approval to the Cal-Maine Settlement and the Sparboe Amendment, the Cal-Maine
Settlement and Amended Sparboe Settlement will be binding upon you and all other
Class Members. By remaining part of the Cal-Maine Settlement, you will give up any
potential claims that you may have against Cal-Maine relating to the claims alleged in
this lawsuit. You may be eligible to receive a payment from the Cal-Maine Settlement if
you submit a completed claim form (postmarked no later than August 1, 2014). Ask to
be excluded: If you wish to exclude yourself from the Sparboe Settlement as amended
(if you had no purchases before October 24, 2009) and/or the Cal-Maine Settlement and
wish to retain your rights to pursue your own lawsuit relating to the claims alleged in
this lawsuit, you must formally exclude yourself from one or both Classes by sending
a signed letter to the Claims Administrator postmarked on or before August 1, 2014.
Object: You may notify the Court that you object to the Cal-Maine Settlement and/or
Sparboe Amendment by mailing a statement of your objection(s) to the Court, Plaintiffs’
Counsel, and Defense Counsel postmarked by August 1, 2014. Detailed instructions on
how to participate, opt out or object are on the settlement website.
The Court appointed Steven A. Asher of Weinstein Kitchenoff & Asher LLC; Michael
D. Hausfeld of Hausfeld LLP; Stanley D. Bernstein of Bernstein Liebhard LLP; and
Stephen D. Susman of Susman Godfrey LLP as Interim Co- Lead Class Counsel. You
do not have to pay them or anyone else to participate. You may hire your own lawyer at
your own expense.
tŚĞŶ;ǁŝ ;ƚŚĞ;;ŽƵƌƚ;ĚĞĐŝĚĞ;ǁŚĞƚŚĞƌ;ƚŽ;ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞ;ƚŚĞ;;Ă ;DĂŝŶĞ;^ĞƩ ĞŵĞŶƚ;
At 2:00 p.m. on September 18, 2014, at the United States District Court, James A. Byrne
Federal Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106-1797, the Court will
hold a hearing to determine the fairness and adequacy of the Cal-Maine Settlement and
the Sparboe Amendment, and consider a motion for an award of attorneys’ fees and
reimbursement of litigation costs. You may appear at the hearing, but are not required
to do so.
Please note that the Court may change the date and/or time of the Fairness
Hearing without further notice. Settlement Class members are advised to check
www.eggproductssettlement.com for any updates.
This notice is only a summary. For more information, visit
Jack Rubinger, Public Relations
Specialist, Graphic Products
Manufacturers should work on organic certification and non-GMO certification. If they
claim to be wheat free/gluten free, they should
get that certification, too. These are hot buttons that retailers now want in the natural food
industry, according to Independent Natural
Food Brokers (INFB).
The biggest issue potentially affecting sea-
food manufacturers is a demand for traceability back to the point
where a fish is taken out of the water, according to Rod Moore,
West Coast Seafood Processors Association (@WCSPA). “To the
extent traceability needs to be displayed on food labels or packaging,
changes will need to be made,” he said.
New legislation can introduce new labeling scenarios. California
is looking at passing a law that will increase the amount of space
required for each chicken in an egg production facility. The proposed
law would prohibit eggs from being sold in California if they came from
non-compliant facilities, even if those facilities were in another state. So
an egg producer in Arkansas must meet the California requirements
to sell their eggs in California. Tagging and marking egg containers
and egg shipments with labels will be critical to ensure only eggs from
California-approved egg “farms” are reaching Californians. ◆