San Francisco has always been a great restaurant town, and if anything, the food and dining options have only gotten better over the last 20 years. Come to think of it, the food and dining scene has improved most everywhere, to the point that you can find a great meal in all parts across the country. We’ve had the best shrimp and catfish we’ve ever eaten while taking depositions in the South, and, while recently vacationing in a New England town where we spent part of our youth, we could not help but notice the number of really good eateries that were not there before. (Although one beloved greasy spoon had converted to a Starbucks, so not every change was an improvement.) Our collective obsession with food is seen further in the proliferation of food-related television programing, including a Food Network, which we will unabashedly admit to watching and enjoying somewhat regularly.
We are waxing on about San Francisco and food for two reasons. First, this is your blogger’s inaugural blog post, and my law practice is based in the City by the Bay. I have long admired the Drug and Device Law Blog and especially its contributors, who for many years have carried a banner for those of us on the “right side of the v” with intelligence, wit, and above all relentlessness. Day in and day out. Although I am cut from much the same cloth as my co-bloggers, my voice originates from a point west of Princeton, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., and I am thrilled to be joining the effort.
Readers will recall that the Ninth Circuit held last year in Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 679 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2012), that the FDCA barred claims under the federal Lanham Act claiming that food labeling was false and misleading. But Pom Wonderfulbarred claims based on federal law; the Kane plaintiffs purported to allege state-law claims, which made all the difference in the world.