
PROPOSITION 65 DEFENSES

01
Defendants’ own test results are proving that their product is PRISTINE
Irrelevant: the violation is complete when a purchase of a violative product is made. Dubious, too, considering an ability to hand-pick a batch for testing, and, in most cases, an in-house or a liason/motivated lab.
02
Read the brief on this defense distinguishihg the Tri-Umion case. Experienced private enforcers are environmental experts with a lifetime in research of harvesting and manufacturing site(s) and practices, studying the source(s) and history of pollution. They author studies and literature and file only cases with egregious violations, where safe levels exceed from dozens to 100 times; with clear and overwhelming evidentiary support of toxicity resulting from anthropogenic activity. Read more
03
manufacturer/brand holder indemnifies retailers like Amazon, Walmart, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, Kroger
Intra-defendants' relationships have no bearing on their liability for violations of the California Health and Safety Code.
04
Sales were minimal
Sales will be assessed based on third party data, subpoenas can be issued to merchant payment providers and POS data aggregators, including Circana/IRI, Nielsen/NIQ. After sales are verified, they will be assesed together with toxicity levels, on a comparative table with past penalties paid by other defendants- think "Sentencing Guidelines."
05
Defendants stopped selling after receiving the NOV
A very welcome defense. The defendant will only be held liable for the period of one year prior to violations until the last product is sold in CA, and the enforcer will monitor those closely.
06
Defendant is only a distributor, not a manufacturer or a retailer
Distributors are jointly and severally liable with manufacturers and retailers under Proposition 65.