Category Archives: Petcurean Pet Nutrition

Petcurean-General Info and Contact


Petcurean Pet Nutrition
109-8899 Charles Street
Chilliwack, British Columbia
Canada V2P 7H9
Ph:604-701-0209

Dog and Cat Food

WEBSITE: http://www.petcurean.com/index.php?page_id=1

STORE LOCATOR: http://www.petcurean.com/dealer_location2.php

Petcurean was founded in 1999 as a small start-up company, based on a unique concept that utilized concentrated forms of meat and human grade ingredients to formulate a pet food that replicated what our families enjoyed at home every day.

Petcurean remains uniquely mission driven; we are extremely selective about our ingredients, dedicated to our quality core values, unwavering to our demanding quality standards and most recently committed to a sustainable long-term environmental program that supports the likes of local farmers and fruit growers. Today we are minimizing processing while maximizing nutrition with fresh, locally grown ingredients .

Our passion and determination for quality has helped form the pet food company we are today. Thanks to our quality suppliers, employees, families, distributors, retailers, consumers and most importantly our four footed family friends we continue to lead the way in healthier nutrition one bag at a time!
READ MORE: http://www.petcurean.com/index.php?page_id=194

2006-03-22-Legal Docs-Merrick is involved here!


2006/03/22
COURT HEARING:
ALAMEDA APPELET COURTS http://tinyurl.com/bvgp4t

TemplateName=html/complittentativerulinginfo.html&CaseNbr=VG04135956&CurrBatchNbr=1
TR – Motion to Strike – Denied
This Tentative Ruling is issued by Judge Ronald M. Sabraw Motion to strike of Pet Nutrition Inc. regarding the First Amended Cross-Complaint of Pet Food Express is DENIED. See separate order.
——————————————————————————–
2006/03/22
TR – Demurrer Sustained With Leave to Amend
This Tentative Ruling is issued by Judge Ronald M. Sabraw Demurrer of Petcurean Pet Nutrition Inc. to First Amended Cross-Complaint of Pet Food Express is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. See separate order. Pet Food Express must file a Second Amended Cross-Complaint on or before April 5, 2006. Cross-Defendants must file responsive pleadings on or before May 1, 2006.
——————————————————————————–
2006/03/22
TR – Motion to Amend – Granted
This Tentative Ruling is issued by Judge Ronald M. Sabraw FACTUAL BACKGROUND. Petcurean Pet Nutrition is a Canada based company that manufactures, distributes, and sells Go! Natural pet food. Go! Natural pet food is marketed as a natural pet food. Pet Food Express marketed and sold Go! Natural pet food in California.

In June 2003, Petcurean retained Merrick (Blue Sky) to manufacture the pet food in the United States.

In October 2003, Petcurean and Pet Food Express starting receiving notices that pets who ate the pet food were getting ill. Petcurean issued a recall of the pet food and Pet Food Express created a claims process for pet owners to seek reimbursement for food refunds, pet testing, and certain medical bills.

In a subsequent investigation by the FDA, it appeared that the ingestion of Go! Natural pet food was the only common factor identified in the case of identified pets. The FDA also found that in many of its tests the amount of BHA (an anti-oxidant) in the pet food manufactured by Merrick was above the regular levels. PROCEDURAL ISSUES.

On March 10, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal from the Court’s order denying Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Plaintiffs have informed the Court that they may abandon the appeal based how the Court decides the issues addressed in this order and the motion for consolidation to be heard on April 6, 2006. The issues addressed by this order and to be addressed in the motion for consolidation are not affected directly by the class certification order, so the Court will not stay these proceedings automatically under C.C.P. 916. After April 6, 2006, any party may file a motion to stay these proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal from the order denying class certification.

Plaintiffs have filed a motion to consolidate Match v. Petcurean and Hanrahan v. Petcurean and that motion is set for April 6, 2006. The Court treats the motions heard on March 22, 2006, as parallel motions that are filed and heard separately in Match v. Petcurean and Hanrahan v. Petcurean. MOTION OF PLAINTIFFS FOR LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Motion of Plaintiffs for leave to file Third Amended Complaint is GRANTED.

Plaintiffs seek leave to amend to add a claim for fraud against Petcurean and Merrick and to seek emotional distress and punitive damages related to the intentional tort of fraud. Defendants Petcurean and Merrick oppose the motion for leave to amend, arguing that the evidence will not support those claims, that Plaintiffs unreasonably delayed in asserting the claims, and that the new allegations will require new discovery.

The Court is guided by the policy of permitting amendments to the pleadings liberally to ensure that all claims and defenses are presented in a case. The proposed complaint adequately states a claim for fraud against Petcurean and Merrick. If Plaintiff can prove their claim for intentional fraud, then they might be permitted to recover emotional distress and punitive damages.

The Court has considered Klein v. Earth Elements, Inc. (1997) 59 Cal. App. 4th 965, and finds it distinguishable because it concerns the unintentional sale of contaminated pet food and was decided at summary judgment. Plaintiffs have not unreasonably delayed in asserting the claims. If Plaintiffs or Defendants seek extensive new discovery, the Court will consider limitations on discovery or similar remedial measures to limit any burden caused by the amendments. Plaintiffs have submitted a revised proposed Third Amended Complaint that addresses certain of the ministerial objections made by Defendants. Plaintiffs must file the revised proposed Third Amended Complaint on or before March 31, 2006. Defendants must file responsive pleadings on or before May 1, 2006. DEMURRER OF PETCUREAN PET NUTRITION INC. TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF PET FOOD EXPRESS. Demurrer of Petcurean Pet Nutrition Inc. to First Amended Cross-Complaint of Pet Food Express is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

This motion concerns the First Amended Cross-Complaint of Pet Food Express filed on January 18, 2006. Demurrer to the fourth cause of action for fraud is OVERRULED. Under the heightened pleading standards for fraud, Pet Food Express adequately states a claim against Petcurean. Demurrer to the fifth cause of action for unfair competition and false advertising under Business and Professions Code 17200 et seq and 17500 et seq (the “UCL”) is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. This claim, particularly paragraph 30, is vague. Pet Food Express adequately states a claim against Petcurean on its own behalf. Paragraph 30, however, implies that Pet Food Express is seeking to prosecute the UCL claim on behalf of a class of persons or on behalf of the general public. Following the Court’s recent order on the motion of Plaintiffs for class certification, it appears highly unlikely that the Court would grant a similar motion for class certification brought by Pet Food Express.

Following the recent amendments to the UCL made by proposition 64, it appears that a private party can no longer represent the general public. Pet Food Express must file a Second Amended Cross-Complaint on or before April 5, 2006. Cross-Defendants must file responsive pleadings on or before May 1, 2006. MOTION TO STRIKE OF PET NUTRITION INC. REGARDING CROSS-COMPLAINT OF PET FOOD EXPRESS. Motion to strike of Pet Nutrition Inc. regarding the First Amended Cross-Complaint of Pet Food Express is DENIED.

The Cross-Complaint adequately alleges a basis for the award of punitive damages – that Petcurean willfully sold Go! Natural pet food to Pet Food Express knowing that the ingredients in the food were different from the ingredients on the label.

This is a claim for an intentional tort, not mere negligence in the sale and marketing of pet food. See Robinson Helicopter Co., Inc. v. Dana Corp. (2005) 34 Cal. 4th 979, 991-992 (plaintiff can state tort claim when a defendant has made affirmative misrepresentations on which the plaintiff has relied and which exposed the plaintiff to liability for personal damages independent of the plaintiff’s economic loss). The Court has considered Klein v. Earth Elements, Inc. (1997) 59 Cal. App. 4th 965, and finds it distinguishable because it concerns the unintentional sale of contaminated pet food and was decided at summary judgment. The Court has considered McDonell v. American Trust Co. (1955) 130 Cal. App. 2d 296, and finds it distinguishable because in that case the plaintiff alleged only that the defendant landlord was aware of the defective condition of the roof and drains and, knowing they could cause damage, refused to repair them.

Those allegations did not describe an intentional tort because they failed to allege that the landlord not only created an unreasonable risk of bodily harm but also that there was a high degree of probability that substantial harm would result.

The Complaint in this case adequately alleges that Petcurean knew there was a high degree of probability that substantial harm would result when it sold contaminated pet food.

2003-12-15-Recall Update! Petcurean Go! Natural


2003-12-15

Note

Just a Note.

~ Postscript: On April 8, 2004, the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Veterinary Medicine reclassified this voluntary recall as a market withdrawal. A market withdrawal occurs when a product has a minor violation that would not be subject to FDA legal action. The firm removes the product from the market or corrects the violation.~

http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/dec03/031215d.asp
Petcurean Go! Natural pet food recalled

Petcurean Pet Nutrition Inc. of Canada has voluntarily recalled all Go! Natural pet food manufactured in Texas. The recalled product comes in 4-, 8-, 12-, and 30-pound bags, with the recall in effect for all lot codes. Removal of recalled product from store shelves was completed Oct. 22.

The company initiated the recall after investigating the possibility that product manufactured in Texas may have made 13 dogs and cats ill. Signs, although not conclusively identified with recalled product, included rashes, vomiting, and liver dysfunction. In these 13 suspect cases, six of the animals died. Following reports to date, it appears that only a fraction of a percentage of animals ingesting the product are affected.

Petcurean initiated extensive independent testing of ingredients and production operations for Texas-manufactured product in October, after receiving reports of possibly related illnesses. No evidence has resulted to date, and testing will continue.

Consumers, veterinarians, pet agencies, and breeders who have questions concerning the recalled product may call Michele Dixon at Petcurean, toll free, at (866) 864-6112, Ext. 104. The company asks consumers to return recalled product to their local retail store for reimbursement or replacement.

The recalled product is from limited production in Texas between June and September of this year. Petcurean is exploring the possibility that one batch of production is responsible. This batch is the equivalent of approximately 53 30-pound bags of pet food. Production of Go! Natural at the Texas facility was suspended, and future production will be handled in Canada.

2003-10-22-Recall! Petcurean Go! Natural Pet Food


2003-11-03

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CVM_Updates/petcureanrc.htm
Alert to Pet Owners – Recall of Petcurean Go! Natural Pet Food

Note

Just a Note.

~ On April 8, 2004, the Center for Veterinary Medicine reclassified this voluntary recall as a market withdrawal.~

On October 22, 2003, Canadian dog-and-cat food marketer Petcurean Pet Nutrition, Inc. announced an immediate voluntary recall of all Go! Natural pet food manufactured in Texas. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to receive reports from veterinarians indicating an association between Go! Natural dog food, and dogs being treated for liver disease or liver failure.

FDA suggests owners who have fed their dogs this product during the months of September and October consider having their dogs checked by their veterinarian for signs of liver disease and anemia.

Recalls are actions taken by a firm to remove a product from the market. The recalled product comes in four, eight, 12 and 30-pound bags, with the recall in effect for all lot codes. Pet owners are urged to return recalled Go! Natural dog food to the place that they purchased it.

Issued by:
FDA, Center for Veterinary Medicine,
Communications Staff, HFV-12
7519 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855
Telephone: (240) 276-9300 FAX: (240) 276-9115
Internet Web Site: http://www.fda.gov/cvm