Jaime’s Spanish Village Jalapeno Ranch Dressing Recall Expanded Over Undeclared Eggs
The FDA has expanded a recall of Jaime’s Spanish Village Jalapeno Ranch dressing due to undeclared eggs, with additional UPC and lot codes now included.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 26, 2026, 9:36 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 26, 2026, 9:53 p.m. ET
FDA Reports Illnesses in Jalapeno Ranch Dressing Recall
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received reports of illnesses associated with the recalled Jaime’s Spanish Village Jalapeno Ranch dressing, according to foodsafetynews.com. The agency had previously announced the recall on August 26, 2026, due to the product containing undeclared eggs, which poses a risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reactions.
The recalled dressing, produced by Jaime’s Foods ATX, was distributed at Central Market retail stores in Texas and local independent retailers in Austin. The product is packed in 16 oz (45.5g) glass jars with UPC #199284564923 and lot codes 69, 86, 108, 113, 116, and 121. The FDA has not specified the number or nature of the reported illnesses, and the cause of the reactions has not been determined.
Aug 26, 2026, 9:36 p.m. ETFirst report
Jalapeno Ranch Dressing Recalled Due to Undeclared Eggs
Jaime’s Foods ATX is recalling Jaime’s Spanish Village Jalapeno Ranch dressing because it contains undeclared eggs, which could cause serious or life-threatening allergic reactions in people with egg allergies, according to a report from Food Safety News. The recall was reported on August 26, 2026.
The product is packed in 16 oz (45.5g) glass jars and was distributed to Central Market retail stores in Texas and local independent retailers in Austin. The recalled jars carry UPC #199284564923 and lot codes 69, 86, 108, 113, 116, and 121. No illnesses have been reported to date, according to Food Safety News.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- Jalapeno ranch dip recalled because of undeclared eggsfoodsafetynews.com
Revision history
- Version 127 Aug 2026, 01:54current
First published.
- Version 127 Aug 2026, 01:36current
First published.
- Version 127 Aug 2026, 01:53current
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.