27 C.F.R. § 7.29

Personalized labels

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. Applicants for label approval may obtain permission from TTB to make certain changes in order to personalize labels without having to resubmit labels for TTB approval. A personalized label is an alcohol beverage label that meets the minimum mandatory label requirements and is customized for customers. Personalized labels may contain a personal message, picture, or other artwork that is specific to the consumer who is purchasing the product. For example, a brewer may offer individual or corporate customers labels that commemorate an event such as a wedding or grand opening.

(b) Application. Any person who intends to offer personalized labels must submit a template for the personalized label as part of the application for label approval required under §§ 7.21 or 7.24, and must note on the application a description of the specific personalized information that may change.

(c) Approval of personalized label. If the application complies with the regulations, TTB will issue a certificate of label approval (COLA) with a qualification allowing the personalization of labels. The qualification will allow the certificate holder to add or change items on the personalized label such as salutations, names, graphics, artwork, congratulatory dates and names, or event dates without applying for a new COLA. All of these items on personalized labels must comply with the regulations of this part.

(d) Changes not allowed to personalized labels. Approval of an application to personalize labels does not authorize the addition of any information that discusses either the alcohol beverage or characteristics of the alcohol beverage or that is inconsistent with or in violation of the provisions of this part or any other applicable provision of law or regulations.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2021 · leading case: In re Anheuser-Busch Beer Labeling Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., 644 F. App'x 515 (6th Cir. 2016).
In re Anheuser-Busch Beer Labeling Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., 644 F. App'x 515 (6th Cir. 2016). · cites it 5× “In 1936, the FAA adopted a general provision, now found at 27 C.F.R. § 7.29 (a)(1), that forbids any statement on a malt-beverage label that is “false or un *519 true in any particular, or that, irrespective of falsity, directly, or by ambiguity, omission, or inference, .”
O'Hara v. Diageo-Guinness, USA, Inc., 306 F. Supp. 3d 441 (D.D.C. 2018). · cites it 4× “" 27 C.F.R. §§ 7.29 (a)(1). More specifically, § 7.”
Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co., 514 U.S. 476 (1995). · cites it 2× “" Although the Secretary has proscribed the use of various colorful terms suggesting high alcohol levels, 27 CFR § 7.29 (f) (1994), manufacturers still can distinguish a class of stronger malt beverages by identifying them as malt liquors.”
Hornell Brewing Co., Inc. v. Brady, 819 F. Supp. 1227 (E.D.N.Y 1993). “According to BATF regulations, malt beverage labels shall not contain any statement that is false or untrue in any particular, or that tends to create a misleading impression, any statement, design, device or representation of or relating to analyses, standards or tests which…”
Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Couns. v. Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC (6th Cir. 2016). · cites it 5× “In 1936, the FAA adopted a general provision, now found at 27 C.F.R. § 7.29 (a)(1), that forbids any statement on a malt-beverage label that is “false or untrue in any particular, or that, 6 Case No.”
Cooper v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC (S.D.N.Y. 2021). · cites it 2× “at 11 (quoting 27 C.F.R. § 7.29 (a)(7)(iii)).) But the portion of the regulation cited by Defendant omits important qualifying language.”
— 27 C.F.R. § 7.29(1) — 1 case
Hornell Brewing Co., Inc. v. Brady, 819 F. Supp. 1227 (E.D.N.Y 1993). “According to BATF regulations, malt beverage labels shall not contain any statement that is false or untrue in any particular, or that tends to create a misleading impression, any statement, design, device or representation of or relating to analyses, standards or tests which…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.