24812. Oysters.    (In. No. 307.)
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION FILED: 2-6-57, Dist. Md., against Bay Food Prod- 
ucts Co., Inc., Baltimore, Md., to enjoin the interstate shipment of adulterated 
oysters.
CHAESE : The complaint alleged that the defendant was engaged in the business 
of selling and distributing raw shucked oysters in cans; and, that the defend- 
ant had been introducing and delivering for introduction into interstate com- 
merce, oysters which were adulterated within the meaning of 402(b) (2) in. 
that water had been substituted in part for oysters, and 402(b) (4) in that 
water had been added, mixed, and packed with the oysters so as to increase- 
their bulk and reduce their quality.
The complaint alleged also that the articles of food, as shipped by the de- 
fendant, purported to be and were represented as shucked oysters, for which 
definitions and standards of identity have been prescribed by regulations; that 
the standards provide, among other things, that oysters shall be shucked^ 
washed, and drained, prior to packing, in such a manner that not over 5 per- 
cent of drained liquid will be found in the oysters 15 minutes after packing; 
that extensive experimental packs of oysters established, when packed in 
conformity with the standards, that oysters will not exceed the 5 percent limit 
of drained liquid; that specific shipping experiments show that legally packed 
oysters do not subsequently release liquid, and, that there will be no increase 
in the drained liquid content of the cans of oysters with the passage of time 
, after packing; that samples collected from interstate shipments made by the 
defendantj-upon analysis, disclosed the presence of amounts of liquid greatly 
in excess of 5 percent; and, that such analytical findings established that the-
oysters were adulterated by (1) excessive soaking of the oysters in fresh 
water to the extent that:the oysters absorbed a large quantityof it,, (2) the 
addition of water to the cans of oysters at the time of packing, (3) the inade-" 
quate draining of the oysters after washing so that a significant proportion 
of the washwater was retained and packed with the oysters, or (4) a combina- 
tion of the above-mentioned factors.
;¦; The complaint alleged further that, since the time the defendant commenced, 
business in 1951, the Food and Drug Administration had examined 44 inter- 
state shipments of the firm's oysters; that 24 of these shipments (54 percent) 
contained excess drained liquid, as high as 33.7 percent; that 5 of the 24 lots 
were seized because of the presence of added water; and, that none of the 
seizures had been contested. 
-/   :
It was alleged also that the defendant corporation was well aware that its 
activities resulted in violations of the law; that, in addition to the warnings 
received-as a result of the seizure proceedings, repeated warnings had been 
given to the management during factory inspections, as well as at administra- 
tive hearings; and, that, notwithstanding such warnings, the defendant would 
continue to introduce and cause to be introduced and deliver and cause to 
be delivered for introduction into interstate commerce, raw shucked oysters 
adulterated as aforesaid. 
*    :
DISPOSITION :   The Government filed a motion for preliminary injunction, and
an answer to the complaint for injunction was filed by the defehdahtj
<< On 6-27-58, the parties stipulated to dismissal of the complaint without 
prejudice in order that the Food and Drug Administration might conduct 
additional investigational studies to collect further scientific evidence to clarify 
the standard for rawshucked oysters.
FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
CANNED FRUIT