California Prop65 Warning on food labels; how to protect against litigation from products sold without the Prop65 warnings
<p>I would like to understand if a statement, “not for sale in California” on a product label, which is not labeled with a Prop65 warning to meet California’s Prop65 requirements, and is not intended or sale in California, would provide any legal protection should an unknown third-party seller purchase and sell non-Prop65 labeled product, knowingly or unknowingly, to a California customer? Background: Products intended by manufacture for sale in California ARE labeled with the required Prop65 warnings, but the manufacture would prefer not to label all products sold outside of California with CA Prop65 warnings.</p>

<blockquote>
<p>would provide any legal protection should an unknown third-party seller purchase and sell non-Prop65 labeled product</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The label &quot;<em>Not for sale in California</em>&quot; provides <em>at least some</em>, perhaps enough, legal protection.</p>
<p>The FAQ you <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/89875/california-prop65-warning-on-food-labels-how-to-protect-against-litigation-from#comment202967_89875">linked</a> states that &quot;<em>the exposure must result from a deliberate act, like the sale of a product</em>&quot;, and the label reflects that the manufacturer's intent is the opposite of that deliberate act.</p>
<p>You will also notice in the event of a claim of violation the FAQ recommends to &quot;<em>cease sale of the product, [and] instruct retail customers to stop selling the product</em>&quot; (brackets added), which is exactly what the label &quot;<em>Not for sale in California</em>&quot; preemptively does.</p>

california