Item 3. Legal Proceedings
ITEM
3.
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
The
Company was 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 Aldi, Inc. (“Aldi”), a supermarket chain, generally allege
that Aldi sold private label coffee products manufactured by us and by Pan American Coffee Co., LLC (“Pan American”), which
falsely described the number of cups of coffee that could be made from the amount of product purchased. Aldi and Pan American were also
named as defendants in the action. The complaint asserted a variety of claims under New York and California consumer protection laws,
and sought 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. On September 28, 2021, the Court entered an order granting the
Company’s motion to dismiss with prejudice (the “Dismissal Order”). In the Dismissal Order, the Court stated that no
reasonable coffee drinker would be deceived by the Company’s packaging. The plaintiffs filed an appeal with the 7 th
Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Appeal”). After the Appeal was filed, the Company and the plaintiffs’ settled the matter
during mediation in late January 2022 and the Appeal was dismissed.
A
significant customer of the Company 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
the Company which falsely described the number of cups of coffee that could be made from the amount of product purchased. The Company
is not named as a defendant in the action, but has 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. The Company believes the allegations in the complaint are wholly without
merit and that the claims asserted are legally deficient, and intends 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. After the end of the period, the parties
finalized the details of a settlement agreement. The final settlement amount was immaterial to the Company’s operations and results
of operations.
ITEM
4.
MINE
SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not
applicable.
PART
II