Our other sites
Today's newsletter | Register | Subscribe | Feedback

Eastman in legal battle over estrogenic claims

By Frank Esposito, Plastics News
Posted 19 June 2012

Eastman Chemical is wrapped up in a legal battle with a pair of Texas firms over claims surrounding Eastman’s Tritan-brand copolyester.

Kingsport, Tenn.-based Eastman filed a lawsuit in January in US District Court in Austin, Texas, against PlastiPure and CertiChem, two additive firms in Austin that share similar ownership.

In the suit, Eastman alleges that PlastiPure and CertiChem have claimed to customers that the Tritan material shows estrogenic activity (EA), even though it does not contain bisphenol-A (BPA), a chemical ingredient found in polycarbonate. BPA had been criticized for alleged health risks, allowing Eastman and other firms to promote their materials as being BPA-free.

A 2008 white paper published by PlastiPure/CertiChem mentions BPA-free plastics that exhibit EA, although it does not mention Tritan by name. A 2010 brochure released by PlastiPure at an infant care trade show – and later made available on the firm’s web site – was titled “EA-Free Plastic Products: Beyond BPA Free”.

In 2011, Plastipure was featured on National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” radio programme. A subsequent item on NPR’s web site showed photos of products made from Tritan, although Eastman again was not mentioned by name.

“Eastman knew these statements [regarding estrogenic activity] to be false and misleading because of the results of its own tests,” Eastman’s attorneys wrote in the filing. “Through this media coverage, PlastiPure continued its pattern of attempting to create consumer fear of plastics so that PlastiPure and CertiChem… could capitalise on the market opportunity.”

Eastman is asking the court to prevent PlastiPure and CeriChem from making EA claims against Tritan in any way, including advertising or promotions.

PlastiPure and CertiChem countered in a 32 February motion to dismiss the case that Eastman “has attempted to use this lawsuit as a proxy for censorship of test results performed on products manufactured from Tritan unrelated to the presence of BPA”.

The case remains active in US District Court. An 10 April filing from US District Judge Sam Sparks said that trial would begin in July, but no date has been set.


Comment on this article.

[ Back ]



TOOLBOX

ALSO IN THIS SECTION
MOST POPULAR STORIES
Site Index [ + ]
Site Index [ - ]
Home:  PRW.com | Contact editorial | Contact advertising | Features List 2012 | About us
End Markets:  Automotive | Packaging | Construction | Medical | Consumer Products | Rubber
Processes:  Injection moulding | Blow moulding | Extrusion | Thermoforming
Supplier News:  Machinery | Materials | Recycling | Moulds | Design
Polymer Prices:  LME prices | Market outlooks | Resin selector
Industry Issues:  Environment | Regulation Competitiveness
Plastics Knowledge:  Knowledge Bank
Comment:  Champ Chat | Clark's Place | Editorials | Business features
People:  Movers & Shakers
PRW Business Directory:  Directory
Classifieds:  Jobs | Classifieds
View:  Mobile | Desktop
Our Events:  PDM | Conferences
Industry Awards:  Industry Awards
Diary: Diary
Advertise with PRW
Subscribe:  PRW print | E-mail products
Reprints:  Reprints
List Rental:  List Rental
Crain Communications:  Crain Communications | Crain Publications

Entire contents copyright 2013 by Crain Communications Inc.
Plastics & Rubber Weekly and PRW.com are published by Crain Communications Ltd (registered in England & Wales No. 01576350).
Registered Office: 100 New Bridge Street, London, EC4V 6JA, United Kingdom.