Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Oct. 01, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	7. Commitments and Contingencies The Company is exposed to claims and litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business and uses various methods to resolve these matters that are believed to best serve the interests of the Company’s stakeholders. The Company’s primary contingencies are associated with self-insurance obligations and litigation matters. Self-insurance liabilities require significant judgment and actual claim settlements and associated expenses may differ from the Company’s current provisions for loss. Proposition 65 Coffee Action On April 13, 2010, an organization named Council for Education and Research on Toxics (“CERT”) filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, against nearly 80 defendants who manufacture, package, distribute or sell brewed coffee, including the Company. CERT alleged that the defendants failed to provide warnings for their coffee products of exposure to the chemical acrylamide as required under California Health and Safety Code section 25249.5, the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65. CERT seeks equitable relief, including providing warnings to consumers of coffee products, as well as civil penalties. The Company, as part of a joint defense group, asserted multiple defenses against the lawsuit. On May 7, 2018, the trial court issued a ruling adverse to defendants on these defenses to liability. On October 1, 2019, before the court tried damages, remedies and attorneys' fees, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment adopted a regulation that exempted “Exposures to listed chemicals in coffee created by and inherent in the processes of roasting coffee beans or brewing coffee” from Proposition 65’s warning requirement. On August 25, 2020, the court granted the defense motion for summary judgment based on the regulation, and the case was dismissed. On November 20, 2020, CERT filed a notice of appeal to appeal the ruling on the defense motion for summary judgment. On October 26, 2022, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision. In December 2022, CERT appealed this ruling to the Supreme Court of the State of California, which denied the petition for review in February 2023, concluding the matter.

Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Oct. 01, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

7. Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is exposed to claims and litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business and uses various methods to resolve these matters that are believed to best serve the interests of the Company’s stakeholders. The Company’s primary contingencies are associated with self-insurance obligations and litigation matters. Self-insurance liabilities require significant judgment and actual claim settlements and associated expenses may differ from the Company’s current provisions for loss.

Proposition 65 Coffee Action

On April 13, 2010, an organization named Council for Education and Research on Toxics (“CERT”) filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, against nearly 80 defendants who manufacture, package, distribute or sell brewed coffee, including the Company. CERT alleged that the defendants failed to provide warnings for their coffee products of exposure to the chemical acrylamide as required under California Health and Safety Code section 25249.5, the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65. CERT seeks equitable relief, including providing warnings to consumers of coffee products, as well as civil penalties.

The Company, as part of a joint defense group, asserted multiple defenses against the lawsuit. On May 7, 2018, the trial court issued a ruling adverse to defendants on these defenses to liability. On October 1, 2019, before the court tried damages, remedies and attorneys' fees, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment adopted a regulation that exempted “Exposures to listed chemicals in coffee created by and inherent in the processes of roasting coffee beans or brewing coffee” from Proposition 65’s warning requirement. On August 25, 2020, the court granted the defense motion for summary judgment based on the regulation, and the case was dismissed.

On November 20, 2020, CERT filed a notice of appeal to appeal the ruling on the defense motion for summary judgment. On October 26, 2022, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision. In December 2022, CERT appealed this ruling to the Supreme Court of the State of California, which denied the petition for review in February 2023, concluding the matter.