Item 1. Legal Proceedings
ITEM
1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
We
were named as a defendant in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
(the “Court”) on or about December 21, 2020. The plaintiffs, Eileen Brodsky and Rhonda Diamond, purported to represent a
class of individuals who purchased coffee products at one of our supermarket customers, generally allege that such client sold private
label coffee products manufactured by us and one of our partners, which falsely described the number of cups of coffee that could be
made from the amount of product purchased. These parties were also named as defendants in the action. The complaint asserted a variety
of claims under New York and California consumer protection laws, and seeks unspecified monetary damages, including disgorgement and
restitution, as well as other forms of relief including class certification, declaratory and injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees,
and interest. We believe the allegations in the complaint are wholly without merit and that the claims asserted are legally deficient,
and the company intends to vigorously defend the action. On September 28, 2021, the Court entered an order granting our motion to dismiss
with prejudice (the “Dismissal Order”). In the Dismissal Order, the Court stated that no reasonable coffee drinker would
be deceived by our packaging. The plaintiffs filed an appeal with the 7 th Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Appeal”).
After the Appeal was filed, we settled the matter during mediation in late January 2022 and the Appeal was dismissed.
A
significant customer of ours was named as a defendant in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts (the “Massachusetts District Court”) on or about February 2, 2021, concerning the labeling
on private label coffee productions we sold to the customer. The plaintiff, David Cohen, purporting to represent a class of individuals
who purchased coffee products from our customer, generally allege that the customer sold private label coffee products manufactured by
us which falsely described the number of cups of coffee that could be made from the amount of product purchased. We are not named as
a defendant in the action, but we have agreed to indemnify the customer for the costs and expenses incurred in defending the lawsuit
and for any liability the customer may suffer as a result. The complaint asserts a variety of claims under Massachusetts consumer protection
laws, and seeks unspecified monetary damages as well as other forms of relief including class certification, declaratory and injunctive
relief, attorneys’ fees, and interest. We believe the allegations in the complaint are wholly without merit and that the claims
asserted are legally deficient, and we intend to vigorously support the customer in defending the action. On February 28, 2022, the
Company and the plaintiff, in his individual capacity and not on behalf of a presumptive class, resolved the matter in principle and
have reported the agreement in principle to the Massachusetts District Court. The parties are presently negotiating the final details
of a settlement agreement to finalize the settlement.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.