Council for Education and Research etc. v. Starbucks Corp.

INTRODUCTION

The Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT) brought these actions under Proposition 651 (Prop. 65) against respondents, dozens of companies that roast, distribute, or sell coffee.2 CERT claimed that respondents

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. (Health & Saf. Code, § 25249.5 et seq.) “Proposition 65 prohibits any person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any (Fn. is continued on the next page.)

4 had failed to provide required Prop. 65 warnings for their coffee products based on the presence of acrylamide, which is included in the Prop. 65 list of known carcinogens and is naturally produced in coffee as a result of the roasting and brewing processes. While the litigation was pending, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (the Agency), charged with implementing Prop. 65, adopted a new regulation providing that “[e]xposures to chemicals in coffee, listed on or before March 15, 2019 as known to the state to cause cancer, that are created by and inherent in the processes of roasting coffee beans or brewing coffee do not pose a significant risk of cancer.” (Cal. Code…