U.S. Code
»
Title 21
» Chapter CHAPTER 12— MEAT INSPECTION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS; ADULTERATION AND MISBRANDING
21 U.S.C. § 610
Prohibited acts
No person, firm, or corporation shall, with respect to any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines, or any carcasses, parts of carcasses, meat or meat food products of any such animals—(a) Slaughtering animals or preparation of articles capable of use as human foodslaughter any such animals or prepare any such articles which are capable of use as human food at any establishment preparing any such articles for commerce, except in compliance with the requirements of this chapter;
(b) Humane methods of slaughterslaughter or handle in connection with slaughter any such animals in any manner not in accordance with the Act of August 27, 1958 (72 Stat. 862; 7 U.S.C. 1901–1906);
(c) Sales, transportation, and other transactionssell, transport, offer for sale or transportation, or receive for transportation, in commerce, (1) any such articles which (A) are capable of use as human food and (B) are adulterated or misbranded at the time of such sale, transportation, offer for sale or transportation, or receipt for transportation; or (2) any articles required to be inspected under this subchapter unless they have been so inspected and passed;
(d) Adulteration or misbrandingdo, with respect to any such articles which are capable of use as human food, any act while they are being transported in commerce or held for sale after such transportation, which is intended to cause or has the effect of causing such articles to be adulterated or misbranded.
(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, § 10, formerly 8th par., 34 Stat. 1262; renumbered § 10 and amended Pub. L. 90–201, §§ 1, 7, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 584, 589; Pub. L. 95–445, § 3, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1069.)Editorial NotesReferences in TextAct of August 27, 1958, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 85–765, Aug. 27, 1958, 72 Stat. 862, which is classified generally to chapter 48 (§ 1901 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.
Sections 1903 and 1905 of Title 7, included within reference to Act of August 27, 1958, were repealed by Pub. L. 95–445, § 5(b), Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1069, effective as set forth in section 7 of Pub. L. 95–445, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 603 of this title.
CodificationSection was formerly classified to section 78 of this title.
Amendments1978—Subsecs. (b) to (d). Pub. L. 95–445 added subsec. (b) and redesignated former subsecs. (b) and (c) as (c) and (d), respectively.
1967—Pub. L. 90–201, § 7, included the list of animals and prohibited, except in compliance with requirements of this chapter, slaughtering animals or preparation of articles capable of use as human food, sales, transportation, and other transactions, and acts of adulteration or misbranding, incorporating in subsec. (b)(2) existing prohibition on distributions in interstate or foreign commerce of noninspected articles.
Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1978 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 95–445 effective one year after Oct. 10, 1978, and an additional eighteen month period thereafter in hardship cases, see section 7 of Pub. L. 95–445, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 603 of this title.
Effective Date of 1967 AmendmentAmendment by Pub. L. 90–201 effective Dec. 15, 1967, except that subsecs. (b)(1) and (c) of this section effective upon expiration of sixty days after Dec. 15, 1967, see section 20(a) of Pub. L. 90–201, set out as an Effective Date note under section 601 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Kent J. Brummels, 15 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 1994).
· cites it 3× “Kent Brummels pleaded guilty to violating 21 U.S.C. § 610 (a) (1988), which prohibits the adulteration of meat capable for use as human food.”
Cmty. Nutrition Inst. v. John R. Block, Sec'y of Agric., 749 F.2d 50 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
· cites it 2× “As to the name change from Mechanically Processed (Species) Product to Mechanically Separated (Species): The Secretary explained deletion of the word “product” on grounds that it was unnecessary and inconsistent with the labeling requirements for other types of food.”
Nat'l Meat Assn. v. Harris, 132 S. Ct. 965 (2012).
“13(a); 21 U. S. C. § 610 (c). The inspector also has an intermediate option: If he determines that an animal has a less severe condition — or merely suspects the animal of having a disease meriting condemnation — he classifies the animal as “U.”
Am. Meat Inst. v. Leeman, 180 Cal. App. 4th 728 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
“” ( 21 U.S.C. § 610 (c).) 5 Meat is misbranded if, among other things, “its labeling is false or misleading in any particular.”
United States v. Alan S. Agnew, 931 F.2d 1397 (10th Cir. 1991).
“II The appellant next contends that 21 U.S.C. § 610 (b)(1) requires for conviction proof of “scienter” or “specific intent” and that the court erred in its instruction to the jury that “general intent” was sufficient.”
Moyer Packing Co. v. United States, 567 F. Supp. 2d 737 (E.D. Pa. 2008).
“See 21 U.S.C. §§ 610 (c)(1), 676. However, it has been established that FSIS inspectors, and not plant employees, must “make the critical determination whether a [meat] product is adulterated or unadulterated.”
West v. Bergland, 611 F.2d 710 (8th Cir. 1979).
“2 On January 14, 1977, West was convicted, after his plea of guilty, of conspiring to violate 21 U.S.C. §§ 610 (c) and 676 in causing meat to be misbranded, in violation *714 of 18 U.”
Del Real, LLC v. Harris, 966 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (E.D. Cal. 2013).
“13 (a); 21 U.S.C. § 610 (c)). Federal meat inspectors may also utilize an intermediate option, “U.”
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.