Nitricity, Inc. vs California Department of Food and Agriculture, et al.

26CV-03684 Nitricity, Inc. vs California Department of Food and Agriculture, et al.

Ruling on Preliminary Injunction

This matter having been submitted to the Court for ruling following a hearing on July 31, 2026, Petitioner’s request for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED.

The Court has thoroughly reviewed and balanced the potential harms a preliminary injunction might cause or prevent against the Petitioner’s likelihood of success on the merits of the petition. At the time of the hearing, the Court announced a tentative ruling to deny the preliminary injunction on the basis of potential widespread harm that might occur if Petitioner’s fertilizer product continues to be distributed and sold as “organic.” At the time, the Court took the view that these potential and unquantifiable harms far outweighed the likelihood of success on the merits.

However, though the course of the hearing and arguments of counsel, it became clear to the Court that such harms are speculative, and even if they were to occur, these harms would not put the health and safety of the public at risk. The Court acknowledges the importance of oversight, regulation, and enforcement through the California Department of Food and Agriculture of products to be marketed and sold as “organic” or “non-

synthetic.” The Court further acknowledges the value of the “organic” label and need to ensure public trust in products that claim registration. On balance, however, any harm to CDFA or the public, is substantially outweighed by the irreparable, economic harm to Petitioner, Petitioner’s employees, and Petitioner’s long-term viability as a profitable business, in the event an injunction is not granted and Petitioner nonetheless prevails on the merits.

The Court does believe that in order to mitigate potential harms to the direct consumer and general public that a disclaimer accompanying any sale or marketing of Petitioner’s product is necessary. Such a disclaimer puts the consumer on notice that they are purchasing a product whose registration as “organic” has been called into question by the regulatory agency, the Department of Food and Agriculture.

The Court therefore GRANTS the preliminary injunction and orders as follows:

A. Pending a determination by this Court on the merits of and final judgment on Petitioner’s petition for writ of mandate, Respondents, California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and Karen Ross, in her capacity as Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, are enjoined from:

1. Giving effect to CDFA’s nonrenewal determination with respect to Nitricity’s Ash Tea 2.9-0-0 Liquid Fertilizer (ID # 1003023) and Calcium-Fortified Ash Tea 2.9-0-0 Liquid Fertilizer (ID # 1055817); 2. Taking any action to cause the above products’ OIM registrations to lapse, expire, or become ineffective, or treating the above products’ OIM registrations as having lapsed, expired or become ineffective based on CDFA’s challenged nonrenewal determination or synthetic classification; 3. Taking adverse enforcement action against Nitricity, or the consumers or distributors of the above products based on the distribution, sale, purchase, or use of the products as organic input materials in California for failure to possess OIM registrations, to the extent that alleged failure arises from CDFA’s challenged nonrenewal determination or synthetic classification.