FDA Closes Botticelli Foods Pistachio Nut Butter Recall

The FDA has closed its enforcement action on the bettergoods pistachio nut butter recall, meaning the agency considers the recall carried out.

2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 9:49 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 9, 2026, 9:54 p.m. ET

Developing · checked 2h ago

This recall is open. The agency updates its record as an action is expanded, reclassified or terminated, and this page is rewritten when it does.

We last searched for new coverage of this at Sep 9, 2026, 9:10 p.m. ET — checked 2h ago.

The FDA has closed its enforcement action on the recall of bettergoods brand Pistachio Nut Butter, according to the agency's enforcement report for recall number . The closure means the agency considers the recall carried out. The recall, initiated on July 17, 2026, and reported on September 2, 2026, covered of the product, which the agency said may be contaminated with Salmonella. The product was distributed in . Anyone who still has the product can identify it by the following codes: , Lot LB028ACP04 with an expiration date of January 28, 2027. The product was manufactured by of , NY. The FDA classified the recall as , its most serious category, used where there is a reasonable probability that using the product will cause serious harm or death. Salmonella is a bacterium that causes salmonellosis; the FDA says most people develop diarrhoea, fever and abdominal cramps between 12 and 72 hours after infection, that illness usually lasts four to seven days, and that in some cases it is severe enough to require hospitalisation, with young children, older adults and people with weakened immune systems at greatest risk.

Earlier reports

Sep 9, 2026, 9:49 p.m. ETFirst report
Botticelli Foods Recalls bettergoods Pistachio Nut Butter Over Salmonella Risk
Botticelli Foods, LLC of Hauppauge, New York, is recalling 16,200 units of bettergoods brand Pistachio Nut Butter, NET WT 6.7oz (190g), because the product may be contaminated with Salmonella, according to an FDA enforcement report issued September 2, 2026. The recall, number H-1273-2026, was initiated on July 17, 2026, and remains ongoing.
The affected product carries UPC 194346207961 and lot LB028ACP04 with an expiration date of January 28, 2027. The FDA has classified the action as Class I, which the agency defines as its most serious category, used where there is a reasonable probability that using the product will cause serious harm or death. The recall covers distribution in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, and Wyoming.
Salmonella is a bacterium that causes salmonellosis. The FDA says most people develop diarrhoea, fever and abdominal cramps between 12 and 72 hours after infection, that illness usually lasts four to seven days, and that in some cases it is severe enough to require hospitalisation — with young children, older adults and people with weakened immune systems at greatest risk.
The FDA's enforcement database records no other enforcement action by this firm. In the last two years, 448 food recalls have cited Salmonella, according to the agency's database. The recall is developing and the cause of the contamination has not been determined.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

Version 110 Sept 2026, 01:49current
First published.
Version 110 Sept 2026, 01:54current
First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.