The US International Trade Commission has opened an investigation into certain Cibo Vita confectionery imports following a patent complaint.
The complainant is Promotion in Motion, the owner of the Welch’s fruit snacks brand, according to documents filed by the trade watchdog.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
In a notice issued on 27 May, the USITC said the complaint “alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain coated confectionery products and components thereof that infringe certain claims of the patents asserted by the complainant”.
The respondents named in the case are Cibo Vita of Totowa, New Jersey; Cibo Vita Founders and New Cibo Vita, both of Wilmington, Delaware; and AnaBio Technologies of Dublin in Ireland.
The products covered by the probe include “coated fruit snack products that contain probiotics, and components thereof, including fruit centres, coatings, and encapsulated probiotics”.
Launched in 2009, Cibo Vita is known for its flagship brand, Nature’s Garden.
The company’s products include snack mixes, trail mixes and dried fruits.
The healthy snacks company, which is backed by Citation Capital, is headquartered in Totowa.
Just Food has asked Cibo Vita for comment on the case.
Welch’s fruit snacks are soft, and chewy gummy candies made with real fruit purée and juices.
Promotion in Motion is seeking a limited exclusion order to block imports of the accused products into the US, along with cease and desist orders against the respondents, USITC said.
The USITC clarified that initiating the investigation does not mean “any decision on the merits of the case” has been made.
The commission’s chief administrative law judge will assign the matter to an administrative law judge, and a target completion date will be set within 45 days.
The respondents have 20 days from the date of service to file their responses.
The USITC warned that a failure to respond could result in default findings and the imposition of trade remedies, including the requested exclusion order.
