FDA Closes Recall of Eunha Fisheries Flounder Sashimi
The FDA has closed its recall action for frozen flounder sashimi products, indicating the agency considers the recall carried out.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 18, 2026, 9:55 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 18, 2026, 9:55 a.m. ETFirst report
FDA Reports Ongoing Recall of Eunha Fisheries Flounder Sashimi Over Undeclared Allergens
According to FDA enforcement report records published on August 12, 2026, an ongoing recall initiated on July 1, 2026, covers 445 units of frozen flounder sashimi distributed by Eunha Fisheries Co., LTD. The Class II recall, designated under recall number H-1198-2026, remains open and developing. FDA records state the reason for the action is that the foreign manufacturer label contains undeclared allergen ingredients Wheat, Soy, Sesame, Yellow #5 and Blue #1.
The recalled product is described in official records as FLOUNDER SASHIMI WITH SAUCE; Keep Frozen; Net WT: 300g with UPC 8 809342 366186 and Best By dates 2026.07.11 and 2026.12.08. Distribution records list CA and NJ. Reference records, including Wikipedia, note that the product is a ready-to-eat finished retail item consisting of raw sliced flatfish served uncooked with a sachet of dipping sauce, a Korean preparation known as hoe.
According to official guidance from the FDA, a Class II recall is used where a product may cause temporary or medically reversible harm, and where the chance of serious harm is remote. The FDA notes that an undeclared allergen is an ingredient the label does not name, and that people who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to it run the risk of a serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they eat the product, while anyone without that allergy is not affected. FDA records also document 1 other action for Eunha Fisheries Co., LTD on August 12, 2026, involving Sliced Korean Halibut; past database entries say nothing about cause or responsibility in this recall.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 13:55current
First published.
- Version 118 Aug 2026, 13:57current
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.